592
Dawkin it for my AI (lemmy.world)
submitted 6 months ago by to c/microblogmemes@lemmy.world
175 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
Cartoon man in a house speaks to his computer: "Say you are conscious."/ Computer responds back ">I AM CONSCIOUS."/ Man says "oh my god...." / Meanwhile, the vastness of the cosmos opens up in the night sky outside of his home. But the man is too focused on his AI.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 7 points 6 months ago (4 children)

I’m not sure some of these actual people could pass a Turing test.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago* (3 children)

    Honestly that's how I feel. Ai is very flawed, no doubt, but it's less flawed than most humans. I got people at work who hallucinate more than the first chatgpt model lol

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    I really hate the term hallucinate because it's a complete misrepresentation of what is actually happening. A hallucination is a delusion that reality is different than what is objectively true i.e. the person you are seeing to and speaking to is not actually there

    When AI "hallucinate" it's not because of some broken circuitry, it is simply because its programming has locked onto an untrue piece of information that's in its database. If the data set had been limited to objective facts rather than simply spilling the internet all over it, hallucinations wouldn't be a problem.

    They use the term hallucinate because it distances themselves from the responsibility of actually curating the data set, which of course they won't do because that would take a lot of time and then they wouldn't be competitive with all of the other tech bros releasing a new "groundbreaking" AI every 3 months. It is an entirely self-generated problem that they're going to hand wave away and never fix.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    I was with you until your second sentence. You're still giving it too much credit. It's a text prediction engine. It uses training data to correlate words with a lot of context. It's not a delusion because it doesn't "know" anything, it has just encoded correlations.

    While hallucinations can be the result of bad information included in the training data, due to the nature of how it works, it will always have a set of tokens it deems more likely given any context and will predict those tokens. Now, it's possible that it will predict "I don't know", but only if it decides that that is the most likely response to the prompt. Maybe the context given will correlate closer to a different answer, even with curated training data.

    Uncurated training data doesn't help, of course, but this problem won't be resolved by curating the training data better, just improved (assuming your goal is to get it to be more truthful... Which could counter its ability to innovate and work outside of what it knows for sure, so I'm not even sure if "always be truthful" is even a worthwhile goal for AI, especially from the perspective of those who own and control the big ones, who ultimately get the say unless it's taken from them).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent