- cross-posted to:
- hackernews
- cross-posted to:
- hackernews
You must log in or register to comment.
Some people even think that adding things like “don’t hallucinate” and “write clean code” to their prompt will make sure their AI only gives the highest quality output.
Arthur C. Clarke was not wrong but he didn’t go far enough. Even laughably inadequate technology is apparently indistinguishable from magic.
I find those prompts bizarre. If you could just tell it not to make things up, surely that could be added to the built in instructions?
I believe I got into a conversation on Lemmy where I was saying that there should be a big persistent warning banner stuck on every single AI chat app that “the following information has no relation to reality” or some other thing. The other person kept insisting it was not needed. I’m not saying it would stop all of these events, but it couldn’t hurt.
Everybody knows the world is full of stupid people.
I plugged my local AI into offline wikipedia expecting a source of truth to make it way way better.
It’s better, but I also can’t tell when it’s making up citations now, because it uses Wikipedia to support its own world view from pre training instead of reality.
So it’s not really much better.
Hallucinations become a bigger problem the more info they have (that you now have to double check)
At my work, we don’t allow it to make citations. We instruct it to add in placeholders for citations instead, which allows us to hunt down the info, ensure it’s good info, and then add it in ourselves.
That probably makes sense.
I haven’t played around since the initial shell shock of “oh god it’s worse now”
Everyone knows that AI chatbots like ChatGPT, Grok, and Gemini can often hallucinate sources.
No, no, apparently not everyone, or this wouldn’t be a problem.
In hindsight, I’m really glad that the first time I ever used an LLM it gave me demonstrably false info. That demolished the veneer of trustworthiness pretty quickly.
i don’t think it’s emphasized enough that AI isn’t just making up bogus citations with nonexistent books and articles, but increasingly actual articles and other sources are completely AI generated too. so a reference to a source might be “real,” but the source itself is complete AI slop bullshit
the actual danger of it all should be apparent, especially in any field related to health science research
and of course these fake papers are then used to further train AI, causing factually wrong information to spread even more
the movie idiocracy was a prophecy that we were too arrogant to take seriously.
now go away, I’m baitin
we would be lucky to have a president as down to earth as camacho
When is that movie set again? I want to mark my calender for the day the US finally gets a compitent president.
Movie was set in 2505… We’re speed-running it. We should get our first pro-wrestler president in our lifetime.
Trump is literally a WWE Hall of Famer.
Trump technically is one. We are all ready there.
It’s a shit ouroboros, Randy!
It’s new quantities, but an old mechanism, though. Humans were making up shit for all of history of talking.
In olden days it was resolved by trust and closed communities (hence various mystery cults in Antiquity, or freemasons in relatively recent times, or academia when it was a bit more protected).
Still doable and not a loss - after all, you are ultimately only talking to people anyway. One can build all the same systems on a F2F basis.
The scale is a significant part of the problem though, which can’t just be hand waved away.
That part of the problem makes rules of the game more similar to how they were before the Internet. It’s almost a return to normalcy.
At a cwetain point, quantity has a quality of its own.
i’m not understanding what you’re saying. “Still doable and not a loss”??
sounds like something AI would say
There’s an old Monty Python sketch from 1967 that comes to mind when people ask a librarian for a book that doesn’t exist.
They predicted the future.
Ahahahahaha one of the best I’ve seen thanks
Are you sure that’s not pre-Python? Maybe one of David Frost’s shows like At Last the 1948 Show or The Frost Report.
Marty Feldman (the customer) wasn’t one of the Pythons, and the comments on the video suggest that Graham Chapman took on the customer role when the Pythons performed it. (Which, if they did, suggests that Cleese may have written it, in order for him to have been allowed to take it with him.)
Thanks for this, I hadn’t seen this one!
It’s always a treat to find a new Monty Python sketch. I hadn’t seen this one either and had a good laugh
This and many other new problems are solved by applying reputation systems (like those banks use for your credit rating, or employers share with each other) in yet another direction. “This customer is an asshole, allocate less time for their requests and warn them that they have a bad history of demanding nonexistent books”. Easy.
Then they’ll talk with their friends how libraries are all possessed by a conspiracy, similarly to how similarly intelligent people talk about Jewish plot to take over the world, flat earth and such.
Its a fun problem trying to apply this to the while internet. I’m slowly adding sites with obvious generated blogs to Kagi but it’s getting worse
Skill issue, just use the Library of Babel
