we are walking in a very dangerous path where people are tending to believe the AIs, like here people taking for granted that since the AI told that they do have an account, this statement must have a percentage of truth and they are shocked. They believe that the AI slipped and admitted it instead of it just made up a plausible reply.
There’s no such thing as an LLM “knowing” an answer. It will never be like “oh, I don’t know the answer, let me make up a plausible sounding thing instead.” It just will always make a plausible sounding answer whenever it can. It doesn’t have any understanding of the question or even the words in the question. It’s like a very advanced cargo cult of words and language. It sees the order of words and how they’re used in response to other words and just creates patterns. It has literally no understanding of those words. It’s just really good at patterns so it can be correct a lot of the time. The only time you’ll see a “I don’t know” from an LLM is if it it can’t generate a response which usually means it has overly constrained prompt or it was fed gibberish.
I don’t know who you guys think needs those semi-correct explanations filled with half personal opinion. It seems somewhat obvious that the mentioned understanding of patterns likely results in something that could well be considered understanding in general.
Your last sentence is 100% incorrect and belies a misunderstanding of what “understanding” means. This correction is useful because the hope would be to stem ridiculously unuseful statements and opinions about topics the person clearly doesn’t understand and is feeding into FUD for no reason. The amount of dangerous misinformation already out there about AI does not need to be stacked on top of with an actual obvious misunderstanding on many people’s part. Dont make an “obvious” claim when it’s anything but factual.
LLMs tend to lie and make up plausible-sounding things, if they don’t know the answer.
we are walking in a very dangerous path where people are tending to believe the AIs, like here people taking for granted that since the AI told that they do have an account, this statement must have a percentage of truth and they are shocked. They believe that the AI slipped and admitted it instead of it just made up a plausible reply.
There’s no such thing as an LLM “knowing” an answer. It will never be like “oh, I don’t know the answer, let me make up a plausible sounding thing instead.” It just will always make a plausible sounding answer whenever it can. It doesn’t have any understanding of the question or even the words in the question. It’s like a very advanced cargo cult of words and language. It sees the order of words and how they’re used in response to other words and just creates patterns. It has literally no understanding of those words. It’s just really good at patterns so it can be correct a lot of the time. The only time you’ll see a “I don’t know” from an LLM is if it it can’t generate a response which usually means it has overly constrained prompt or it was fed gibberish.
I don’t know who you guys think needs those semi-correct explanations filled with half personal opinion. It seems somewhat obvious that the mentioned understanding of patterns likely results in something that could well be considered understanding in general.
Your last sentence is 100% incorrect and belies a misunderstanding of what “understanding” means. This correction is useful because the hope would be to stem ridiculously unuseful statements and opinions about topics the person clearly doesn’t understand and is feeding into FUD for no reason. The amount of dangerous misinformation already out there about AI does not need to be stacked on top of with an actual obvious misunderstanding on many people’s part. Dont make an “obvious” claim when it’s anything but factual.