Re:GPT-5 is behind schedule
by superultra on Monday December 23, 2024 @12:46AM
(#42492119)
I give AI a “water cooler chat” level of veracity, which means it’s about as true as chatting with a coworker at a water cooler when that used to happen. Which is to say if I just need to file the information away as a “huh” it’s fine, but if I need to act on it or cite it, I need to do deeper research.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:GPT-5 is behind schedule
by FergusArgyll on Monday December 23, 2024 @03:00AM
(#42492684)
Yes, so often I see/hear people asking "But how can you trust it?!"
I'm asking it a question about social dynamics in the USSR, what's the worst thing that'll happen?! I'll get the wrong impression?
What are people using this for? are you building a nuclear reactor where every mistake is catastrophic?
Almost none of my interactions with LLMs "Matter", they are things I'm curious about, if 10 out of 100 things I learnt from it are false, then I learned 90 new things. And these are things which mostly I'd have no way to learn about otherwise (without spending significant money on books/classes etc.)
Yes, but how do you know which is which?
That is also a broader epistemological question one could ask about truth on the internet or even truth in general. You have to interrogate reality
Re:GPT-5 is behind schedule
by johnmaguire on Monday December 23, 2024 @10:33AM
(#42495107)
That's certainly true, but I think it's also true that you have more contextual information about the trustworthiness of what you're reading when you pick up a book, magazine, or load a website.
As a simple example, LLMs will happily incorporate "facts" learned from marketing material into it's knowledgebase and then regurgitate it as part of a summary on the topic.
Re:GPT-5 is behind schedule
by das_keyboard on Monday December 23, 2024 @05:36AM
(#42493399)
If you don't care if it's correct or not you can also just make the stuff up. No need to pay for AI to do it for you.