Re:LLMs are still surprisingly bad at some simple tasks
by voat on Sunday September 21, 2025 @08:46AM
(#45322237)
So are people?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:LLMs are still surprisingly bad at some simple tasks
by softwaredoug on Sunday September 21, 2025 @08:49AM
(#45322255)
The difference might be people are actually held accountable for the results.
Re:LLMs are still surprisingly bad at some simple tasks
by uncircle on Sunday September 21, 2025 @08:50AM
(#45322260)
And, in most cases, they tend to learn from their mistakes.
Re:LLMs are still surprisingly bad at some simple tasks
by MattGaiser on Sunday September 21, 2025 @08:53AM
(#45322284)
Why is that better if in aggregate, the people who can be held accountable are worse anyway?
We are killing thousands on the road to be sure we can blame a driver instead of a computer as one example.
Re:LLMs are still surprisingly bad at some simple tasks
by softwaredoug on Sunday September 21, 2025 @09:26AM
(#45322517)
In the self driving case people are still held accountable. Now it’s the model developers and car manufacturers instead of drivers.
Re:LLMs are still surprisingly bad at some simple tasks
by tossandthrow on Sunday September 21, 2025 @08:50AM
(#45322261)
Yes, we also clearly see and upwards pressure on people.
Re:LLMs are still surprisingly bad at some simple tasks
by amelius on Sunday September 21, 2025 @09:12AM
(#45322414)
People are way more reliable.
Re:LLMs are still surprisingly bad at some simple tasks
by gitaarik on Sunday September 21, 2025 @06:52PM
(#45327391)
That's why we have code reviewing. If you review your AI generated code, understand it, and completely agree with it, that's fine of course. But the message of this article is that you still can't blindly rely on AI for even such simple tasks.