-38
what do you think about agentic ai? (programming.dev)
submitted 5 months ago by to c/asklemmy@lemmy.world
39 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] [S] -14 points 5 months ago (10 children)
[deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 5 months ago

    so your claim about it not passing math tests isn’t really correct.

    You base this statement on claims from the company that's trying to sell the product. Maybe try to make chatgpt do some sums first before believing these claims.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago

    openai for example claims

    Claiming something doesn't make it true. If it were true. It wouldn't be a claim it would be a statement of fact which is directly opposed to the point of marketing.

    Seeing as you don't support your claim that it can do permanent head damage maths, I will support my statement of they suck at maths.

    https://www.theregister.com/software/2026/02/26/ai-models-suck-slightly-less-at-math-than-they-did-last-year/5191967

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago

    lol, sorry…the company selling a product made an outlandish claim and you believe it? I got a bridge to sell you!

    I think the fundamental problem is that you haven’t actually used these tools enough to see that the companies peddling them are snake oil salesmen. Nothing they say is true, they’re completely full of shit, and they’re terrified they’re not going to make any of the money they promised their investors they would make.

    And like…if you think about it for a moment it would make sense, given how these tools work, that they can’t do much in the way of reasoning. They just get better and better at replicating the language they’re supposed to mimic, which sometimes even carries the right content! Wow! But that’s only a secondary effect, right?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    That is a testable claim. I just had it calculate the force of gravity between 2 objects and it was wrong by virtue of rounding incorrectly. That's like highschool level math.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] [S] -6 points 5 months ago (3 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Chatgpt, as made available by the first search result for "chatgpt." I chose this approach to match your claim you chose to repeat without verification.

    I am not going to cross shop stochastic regressions with an English LUT in order to find one that works better for math just to appease your suspiciously wheel ladened goal post.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago

    openai ... claims

    so your claim ... isn't really correct

    A company selling a product made an unsubstantiated claim to market their product... Therefore any contradictory claim is assumed to be false?

    If you think this passes for sound logic then I'm sure whatever Chat-GPT can do passes for acceptable math to you.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent