The Google AI isn’t hallucinating about glue in pizza, it’s just over indexing an 11 year old Reddit post by a dude named fucksmith.
The Google AI isn’t hallucinating about glue in pizza, it’s just over indexing an 11 year old Reddit post by a dude named fucksmith.
You're viewing a single thread.
TBH I'm curious what the difference between this and "hallucinating" would be.
I think 'hallucinating' means when it makes up the source/idea by (effectively) word association that generates the concept, rather than here it's repeating a real source.
Couldn't that describe 95% of what LLMs?
It is a really good auto complete at the end of the day, just some times the auto complete gets it wrong
Yes, nicely put! I suppose 'hallucinating' is a description of when, to the reader, it appears to state a fact but that fact doesn't at all represent any fact from the training data.
Well it's referencing something so the problem is the data set not an inherent flaw in the AI
i'm pretty sure that referencing this indicates an inherent flaw in the AI
No it represents an inherent flaw in the people developing the AI.
That's a totally different thing. Concept is not flawed the people implementing the concept are.
"Of course, this flexibility that allows for anything good and popular to be part of a natural, inevitable precursor to the true metaverse, simultaneously provides the flexibility to dismiss any failing as a failure of that pure vision, rather than a failure of the underlying ideas themselves. The metaverse cannot fail, you can only fail to make the metaverse."
-- Dan Olson, The Future is a Dead Mall
yeah thanks
The inherent flaw is that the dataset needs to be both extremely large and vetted for quality with an extremely high level of accuracy. That can't realistically exist, and any technology that relies on something that can't exist is by definition flawed.