Feathercrown comments on Lavalamp too hot

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago* (9 children)

Hmm, interesting theory. However:

We know this is an issue with language models, it happens all the time with weaker ones - so there is an alternative explanation.
LLMs are running at a loss right now, the company would lose more money than they gain from you - so there is no motive.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 9 child comments

[+] jerkface@lemmy.ca 3 points 9 months ago (1 child)

[removed by mod]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] MotoAsh@piefed.social 0 points 9 months ago*

No, it wasn't a virtue signal, you fucking dingdongs.

Capitalism is rife with undercooked products, because getting a product out there starts the income flowing sooner. They don't have to be making a profit for a revenue stream to make sense. Some money is better than no money. Get it?

Fuck, it's like all you idiots can do is project your lack of understanding on others...

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] MotoAsh@piefed.social -2 points 9 months ago (7 children)

Of course there's a technical reason for it, but they have incentive to try and sell even a shitty product.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 7 child comments

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago (6 children)

I don't think this really addresses my second point.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] MotoAsh@piefed.social 0 points 9 months ago (5 children)

How does it not? This isn't a fucking debate. How would artificially bloating the number of tokens they sell not help their bottom line?

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Because they currently lose money for every token sold. They're operating at a loss to generate a userbase so that they can monetize later. They're currently in the pre-enshittification (I still don't like that word) phase where they want to offer a good product at a loss and lure in customers, not phase 2 where they monetize their userbase.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] MotoAsh@piefed.social 0 points 9 months ago (3 children)

and? How do you not understand that more money is better for them even if they're not in the black, yet?

Two things can be true at once.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago* (2 children)

Creating additional tokens LOSES them money. For a single token, the cost of generating it exceeds the profits.

I genuinely don't understand what would drive someone to be this condescending when you don't even understand the argument I have clearly laid out four times now.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] MotoAsh@piefed.social 0 points 9 months ago (1 child)

Do you think they don't want people using their product? Are you really that dense?

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 1 point 9 months ago

Are you? Because now we've agreed on every fact to determine my conclusion is correct. Yes they do want people using their product; they want to lure in customers. Wasting tokens generating unhelpful output would both drive customers away with a worse experience, and cost them more money. So there's no reason for them to do that. Like I said in my first post.