• yuri@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    they’re presented as general knowledge chatbots at the very least, and i know i’d consider spelling pretty general knowledge.

    the way i see it you can either acknowledge the “strawberry question” as a genuine failing of most every publicly accessible LLM, or you can acknowledge that LLMs are only ever actually correct by pure chance. sometimes it’s a REALLY GOOD chance, but at the end of the day it’s still always a variable that you can’t actually control.

    • FaceDeer@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      You see a false dichotomy.

      I see someone pounding away at a ball of yarn with a hammer and complaining that it’s not as good a knitting implement as they imagined.

      • TWeaK@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        You have someone complaining about what people selling AI say it can do, when it can’t do that. You see people complaining that AI can’t do things, when it can do other things.

        You need to try and digest what people are saying better rather than just being contrarian.

      • yuri@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        in this thread i’ve only seen complaints about the implementation, no one has even implied LLM’s are useless.

        • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          tbh people call them useless all the time but they also cherry pick their weakness.

          it is a tool, it has utility. kinda like crypto although grifters seem to always soil promising tech. but in 20 years it will all settle and we will be enslaved, anyways.