this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2023
1035 points (98.2% liked)

People Twitter

5197 readers
1218 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a tweet or similar
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It doesn't "lie" though, it just generates a plausible sequence of words. The sort-of fortunate thing is that facts are often plausible, and it's going to be trained on a lot of facts. But, facts aren't the only word-sequences that are plausible, and LLMs are trained to be creative, and that means sometimes choosing a next-word that isn't the best fit, which might end up meaning the generated sentence isn't factual.

Calling it a "lie" suggests that it knows the truth, or that it is being deceptive. But, that's giving "spicy autocomplete" too much credit. It simply generates word salads that may or may not contain truths.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The industry word for it is "hallucination", but I'm not sure that fits either.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

It's better than lying, but it still implies consciousness. It also implies that it's doing something different than what it normally does.

In reality, it's always just generating plausible words.

[–] MistakenBear32@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's bullshitting... Faking it till it makes it, if you will.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

No, that implies a goal. It's just spicy autocomplete.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

It is certainly more complex than a predictive text machine. It does seem to understand the concept of objective truth, and facts, vs interpretation and inaccurate information. It never intentionally provides false information, but sometimes it thinks it is giving factual information when really it is using an abundance of inaccurate information that it was trained with. I'm honestly surprised at how accurate it usually is, considering it was trained with public data from places like Reddit, where common inaccuracies have reached the level of folklore.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

It is certainly more complex than a predictive text machine

No, it literally isn't. That's literally all it is.

It does seem to understand

Because people are easily fooled, but what it seems like isn't what's actually happening.

but sometimes it thinks it is giving factual information

It's incapable of thinking. All it does is generate a plausible sequence of words.