Comment on AI Seeks Out Racist Language in Property Deeds for Termination

• apotheotic@beehaw.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  You said “they literally do analyze text” when that is not, literally, what they do.

  And no, we don’t “all know” that. Lay persons have no way of knowing whether AI products currently in use have any capacity for genuine understanding and reasoning, other than the fact that the promotional material uses words like “understanding”, “reasoning”, “thought process”, and people talking about it use the same words. The language we choose to use is important!

  source

  • GetOffMyLan@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    No it’s not. It’s pedantic and arguing semantics. It is essentially useless and a waste of everyone’s time.

    source

    • apotheotic@beehaw.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      I never made any “AI bad” arguments (in fact, I said that they may be incredibly well suited to this) I just argued for the correct use of words and you hallucinated.

      source
    • knightly@pawb.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      LLMs arent “bad” (ignoring, of course, the massive content theft necessary to train them), but they are being wildly misused.

      “Analysis” is precisely one of those misuses. Grand Theft Autocomplete can’t even count, ask it how many 'e’s are in “elephant” and you’ll get an answer anywhere from 1 to 3.

      This is because they do not read or understand, they produce strings of tokens based on a statistical likelihood of what comes next. If prompted for an analysis they’ll output something that looks like an analysis, but to determine whether it is accurate or not a human has to do the work.

      source

      • howrar@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        LLMs cannot:

        • Tell fact from fiction
        • Accurately recall data from its training set
        • Count

        LLMs can

        • Translate
        • Get the general vibe of a text (sentiment analysis)
        • Generate plausible text

        Semantics aside, they’re very different skills that require different setups to accomplish. Just because counting is an easier task than analysing text for humans, doesn’t mean it’s the same it’s the same for a LLM. You can’t use that as evidence for its inability to do the “harder” tasks.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    The human capacity for reason is greatly overrated. The overwhelming majority of conversation is regurgitated thought, which is exactly what LLMs are designed to do.

    source

    • apotheotic@beehaw.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      I don’t really dispute that but at least we are able to apply formal analytical methods with repeatable outcomes. LLMs might (and do) achieve a similar result but they do so without any formal approach that can be reviewed, which has its drawbacks.

      source