this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2025
286 points (91.1% liked)
Technology
73379 readers
4145 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That's called testing, and the companies behind these LLMs should, before launch, put a very important amount of their resources into testing.
"Product testing is a crucial process in product development where a product's functionality, performance, safety, and user experience are evaluated to identify potential issues and ensure it meets quality standards before release" (Gemini)
We are literally using alpha/beta software to deal with life altering issues, and these companies are, for some reason, being able to test their products on the public, without consequences.
It's like you bought a car and deliberately hit the wall to make a headline "cars make you disabled". Or bought a hammer, hit your thumb and blame hammers for this.
Guys, it's a TOOL. Every tool is both useful and harmful. It's up to you how you use it.
Car makers test exactly that, and for good measure since cars can and do crash!
What are you suggesting, that we buy cars that didn't pass crash tests?
To me it seems like you arguing something similar for AI.
To me, it seems like they are arguing that "testing" whether a hammer can smash your thumb doesn't actually provide any useful information on the safety of a hammer.
To me, it seems they are saying that Estwing makes a better hammer than Fischer-Price, even though the Fischer-Price hammer is far less likely to cause injury if you hit your thumb.
All this article says is that we shouldn't give a toddler a real hammer, and we shouldn't stuff a general purpose LLM like ChatGPT into a Tickle-Me-Elmo.
Are you saying hammers should be thumb-hitting-proof?