Just to add - I’m working on something very novel and LLM’s are absolutely useless at them. It’s actually comical to see the outputs - when you work on novel stuff you quickly see what these models actually are.
That mistake was made more than two years ago by whatever experimental version of Google's AI overview (which has strict performance requirement- i.e. needs to answer within a split-second) was up at the time. In other words, it was a very small and primitive system specialised in spitting answers as quickly as possible without a second thought. I hope you realise that basing your assessment of what LLMs can or can't do on that example is not much better than suggesting to put glue on pizza. A mistake that, if we were to adopt your reasoning, would in turn set a hard limit to the analytic skills of all humanity.
Of course they are not oracles. Oracles belong to magic, these things are real.
I really can't understand how people seem to expect "intelligence" to be deterministic and infallible and uniform across domains when all examples we have of it (that is, us) are anything but.
I’m sure there are people who think putting glue on a pizza is acceptable but we’re not hiring them to bake pizzas for us.
When I search and get an AI summary it’s either correct or useless. I don’t care how fallible humans are, I’m not asking them to summarize my Google results.
We don't really expect this of intelligence
We do sort of expect this of machines
Most people in society use machines and computers expecting very deterministic behavior, within some constraints. A saw cuts wood as long as your blade isn't dull. A computer shows your emails as long as the power and Internet is not out.
Comparably Unconstrained computer AI systems are still extremely new and there is no social norms or expectations around it yet
> But fundamentally any metaphor will be inadequate, LLMs are too weird. It doesn't make sense to compare a transformer-based deep neural network that autoregressively generates language tokens based on their embedding in a high-dimensional semantic space to really anything that's ever existed.
You might not have read the full post ha
No human being is going to genuinely suggest to glue cheese onto a pizza to stop it sliding off.
These things aren't people. Stop anthropomorphizing a computer program. They'll make all the mistakes humans can make, as well as a new class of mistakes because they're just fancy next word prediction with no lived experience.