this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2024
550 points (96.0% liked)

Technology

59589 readers
2946 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 1 points 3 months ago (4 children)

They absolutely cannot reliably summarize the result of searches, like this post is about

The problem is that it did summarize the result of this search, the results of this search included one of those "if the Earth was the size of a grain of sand, Alpha Centauri would be X kilometers away" analogies. It did exactly the thing you're saying it can't do.

Any meaningful rate of failures at all makes them massively, catastrophically damaging to humanity as a whole.

Nothing is perfect. Does that make everything a massive catastrophic threat to humanity? How have we managed to survive for this long?

You're ridiculously overblowing this. It's a "ha ha, looks like AI made a whoopsie because I didn't understand that I actually asked it to do" situation. It's not Skynet coming to convince us to eat cyanide.

And this is all completely ignoring the obscene energy costs associated with making web searches complete and utter dogshit.

Of course it's ignoring that. It's not real.

You realize that energy costs money? If each web search cost an "obscene" amount, how is Microsoft managing to pay for it all? Why are they paying for it? Do you think they'll continue paying for it indefinitely? It'd be a completely self-solving problem.

[–] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Summaries distinguish substance from nonsense. It cannot be described as a summary of a piece of content if it does not accurately portray the substance of that content.

LLMs aren't imperfect. They're dumpster fire misinformation machines with no redeeming qualities. Of course it's not Skynet. Skynet was intelligent. This isn't within 100 orders of magnitude of intelligence.

Companies burn obscene amounts of money on moonshots all the time, even ones that have no possibility of success. Willingness to lose billions burning energy to degrade every single search made is not an indication that it's not a nightmare for the environment (again, for literally no purpose because every single search with an LLM is worse than without it).

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

No, a summary is just a condensed version of some larger work. If the larger work contains bullshit then so can the summary, that doesn't stop it from being a summary. As you say, a summary accurately portrays the substance of that content. In this case there was content that said Alpha Centauri was 13 km from Earth, so the summary said that too.

This is really not complicated.

Companies burn obscene amounts of money on moonshots all the time, even ones that have no possibility of success.

If you think it has no possibility of success, sit back and relax as AI goes away.

[–] ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 months ago

If you think it has no possibility of success, sit back and relax as AI goes away.

Yep. This is exactly it, and this is what people don't seem to understand. AI is not going away, because it is actually useful, it has actual uses and people are actively using it. It's not entirely fluff based pointless technology like blockchain etc, it is actually useful and real-world people use AI/LLMs.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)