• 0 Posts
  • 8 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 23rd, 2023

help-circle


  • enkers@sh.itjust.workstoTechnology@lemmy.worldI am disappointed in the AI discourse
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    Appreciate the correction. Happen to know of any whitepapers or articles I could read on it?

    Here’s the thing, I went out of my way to say I don’t know shit from bananas in this context, and I could very well be wrong. But the article certainly doesn’t sufficiently demonstrate why it’s right.

    Most technical articles I click on go through step by step processes to show how they gained understanding of the subject material, and it’s layed out in a manner that less technical people can still follow. And the payoff is you come out with a feeling that you understand a little bit more than what you went in with.

    This article is just full on “trust me bro”. I went in with a mediocre understanding, and came out about the same, but with a nasty taste in my mouth. Nothing of value was learned.


  • enkers@sh.itjust.workstoTechnology@lemmy.worldI am disappointed in the AI discourse
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    10 days ago

    I’ll preface this by saying I’m not an expert, and I don’t like to speak authoritatively on things that I’m not an expert in, so it’s possible I’m mistaken. Also I’ve had a drink or two, so that’s not helping, but here we go anyways.

    In the article, the author quips on a tweet where they seem to fundamentally misunderstand how LLMs work:

    I tabbed over to another tab, and the top post on my Bluesky feed was something along these lines:

    ChatGPT is not a search engine. It does not scan the web for information. You cannot use it as a search engine. LLMs only generate statistically likely sentences.

    The thing is… ChatGPT was over there, in the other tab, searching the web. And the answer I got was pretty good.

    The tweet is correct. The LLM has a snapshot understanding of the internet based on its training data. It’s not what we would generally consider a true index based search.

    Training LLMs is a costly and time consuming process, so it’s fundamentally impossible to regenerate an LLM in the same order of magnitude of time it takes to make a simple index.

    The author fails to address any of these issues, which suggests to me that they don’t know what they’re talking about.

    I suppose I could conceded that an LLM can fulfill a similar role that a search engine traditionally has, but it’d kinda be like saying that a toaster is an oven. They’re both confined boxes which heat food, but good luck if you try to bake 2 pies at once in a toaster.