Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Tek say resist (tek@freeradical.zone)'s status on Wednesday, 29-Jan-2025 02:36:09 JST Tek say resist

   in reply to

   • Jer Warren

   @nyquildotorg If you're referring to my post from a little earlier…

   I agree completely. I've heard of people using ChatGPT as their new search engine and the idea horrifies me. Instead of getting links to the original sources, you're getting a lossy, uncited summary of those sources, filtered through whatever biases the modeler accidentally or purposefully injected. No thanks.

   • Embed this notice
     Jer Warren (nyquildotorg@fedia.social)'s status on Wednesday, 29-Jan-2025 02:36:11 JST Jer Warren

     "What good is an AI that can't answer questions about Tiananmen Square?!"
     You're getting so close to understanding... Censorship aside, LLMs are not question-answering machines. They can't answer questions about anything.
     
     My hope is that the fear of "China spying on our AI queries" and "China making AI spit out propaganda answers" would be enough to convince people that maybe treating LLMs as question-answering machines is a terrible idea all around.

     Paul Sutton and anban repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Paul Sutton (zleap@qoto.org)'s status on Wednesday, 29-Jan-2025 02:48:15 JST Paul Sutton

     in reply to

     • Jer Warren

     @tek @nyquildotorg

     Yeah, it will be interesting when people cite chatgpt as a source which one cannot verify as you can't revist that source. At least with WikiPedia or other more credible sources you can put in source url, date etc and people know when you found the source

     Chat gpt is hopeless. a friend found instructions to make slime, just what to do, no ingreident list or how much to use, so from a science viewpoint totally useless.

   • Embed this notice
     Tek say resist (tek@freeradical.zone)'s status on Wednesday, 29-Jan-2025 03:21:11 JST Tek say resist

     in reply to

     • Jer Warren

     @nyquildotorg Same. I think we're solidly in agreement here. I intended to use the Tiananmen Square bit as proof that censorship and unreliability do exist. To what degree, I don't know, but here's evidence that these are *not* reliable.

   • Embed this notice
     Jer Warren (nyquildotorg@fedia.social)'s status on Wednesday, 29-Jan-2025 03:21:12 JST Jer Warren

     in reply to

     @tek I did get the wording from your post, but it's basically a thing I've seen other people saying non-ironically

   • Embed this notice
     Tek say resist (tek@freeradical.zone)'s status on Wednesday, 29-Jan-2025 03:46:18 JST Tek say resist

     in reply to

     • D. B. Stuck
     • Jer Warren

     @MyWoolyMastadon @nyquildotorg Well, I wasn't planning on sleeping tonight.

   • Embed this notice
     D. B. Stuck (mywoolymastadon@toot.community)'s status on Wednesday, 29-Jan-2025 03:46:19 JST D. B. Stuck

     in reply to

     • Jer Warren

     @tek @nyquildotorg

     About eight years ago I read that the majority of younger people were using YouTube as their search engine for information. I found that horrific.

     There's a crazy amount of bad info on YouTube.

     I can only imagine how much worse AI is in getting you a synopsis without understanding the context.