If you can’t trust the result of a query how can you trust the check on that query which is itself a query? If no information is trustworthy how do you make progress?
Re:ChatGPT Search
by BenjiWiebe on Thursday October 31, 2024 @10:03PM
(#42013400)
As you check more and varied sources, you gain confidence in the result, even if you never get to 100%.
Ok but what if we devise a system which does exactly that? Sounds suspiciously like an LLM to me. I’m as skeptical as anyone about LLMs as AGI they do sound like an aggregate of sources so the only question is how trustworthy those sources are.
I think the issue stems from LLMs today are avoiding IP infringement. Spitting out individual words or characters is not infringing until the words form a sentence which is potentially large enough to resemble existing works.
Then there’s the other side like Perplexity where they spit out sentences and reference the sources. So they’re being sued because the infringement is obvious.
What is the path to a trustworthy LLM if you’re not allowed to repeat protected data without a legal hurdle?
AGI while a cool idea is irrelevant because that tech does not exist.
So wouldn't an aggregate, like an LLM, be the best tool here?
Sure but the weak link is Sam Altman and the likes, not the tech.
No because an aggregate can be made of many sources, maybe you restrict your sources to those only you trust, but not every source is correct all the time. So you’re still stuck with needing to fact check.
Do you just inherently accept the result of a query? Or do you always carry some skepticism around? Something something build trust through fact checking.
Many of the "facts" you "know" are really just useful anecdotes, opinions, approximations or mental shortcuts rather than objective facts. These can still be wildly useful, even if they aren't "true" in the pedantic sense...
As a basic example: Newton's laws aren't a fact. They're extremely useful approximations; to get a more-complete picture you need relativistic effects, quantum effects, etc.
As a rule of thumb: Fact check in proportion to the cost of a mistake.
Re:ChatGPT Search
by randomNumber7 on Friday November 01, 2024 @04:47AM
(#42015094)
By reasoning
I know it hurts
How do you know your reasoning is sound?
Re:ChatGPT Search
by kirubakaran on Friday November 01, 2024 @05:56PM
(#42021950)
Predicate logic
It’s a fallacy then. If my mentor tells me something I fact check it. Why would a world exist where you don’t have to fact check? The vision doesn’t have fact checking because the product org never envisioned that outlier. A world where you don’t have to check facts, is dystopian. It means the end of curiosity and the end of “is that really true? There must be something better.”
You’re just reading into marketing and not fact checking the reality in a fact-check-free world.