More like training it wrong. It is just a mimicking engine, not intelligent. If it’s trained on data that includes bad information, it will periodically include that bad information.
Also, wrong settings. Increasing the threshold of confidence in something before it presents it to the user would at least partly increase the accuracy, but also increase how often it would say it doesn’t know how to do something. And for corporate executives, admitting complete ignorance is unfathomable, so of course they don’t want their products admitting it.
MagicShel@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
AI can’t scheme or misbehave. The people selling it are 100% lying about what AI can do, but that doesn’t mean the people taking about how terrible AI is aren’t full of shit on occasion as well. There is so much misinformation oh both sides and combined with how strong opinions are on both sides conversation is borderline pointless.
XLE@piefed.social 1 day ago
I hope that goes without saying, but you’re correct. The humanizing language about AI in this article (freaking “schemes”?!) is completely cribbed from the companies making the positive misleading statements about it. Bit disappointing to see The Guardian falling for it.
In addition to the humanization, it implies the chatbot is getting better at doing things and not worse.
TehPers@beehaw.org 1 day ago
This is exactly what I was thinking. They aren’t programmed to follow the user’s instructions to begin with. Why is it a surprise when they deviate from them?
It’s a fundamental misunderstanding of the ML that goes into these LLMs. They are prediction machines. They might have “specialist” submodels or whatever that are better at predicting specific areas, but that’s about it.