If creating text is like shooting bullets, we should require a license for text editors.
Comment on Dad demands OpenAI delete ChatGPT’s false claim that he murdered his kids
surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 5 weeks agoI have this gun machine that shoots in all directions randomly. I can’t predict it, so I can’t stop it from shooting you. So sorry. It’s uncontrollable.
General_Effort@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
The severity of the impact should not dictate whether a person is accountable for a thing they own, or not.
General_Effort@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
So, licenses for everything?
Anyway, we hold the person accountable who does (or rarely does not) do something, not the owner of a thing. Which is why a libel accusation makes 0 sense here.
michaelmrose@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Maybe people need to learn that AI hallucinates
pyre@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
you misspelled “is fucking wrong all the goddamn time”
michaelmrose@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
It would be more accurate to say that rather than knowing anything at all they have a model of the statistical relationship between a series of tokens and subsequent tokens which words are apt to follow other words and because the training set contains many true things the words produced in response to queries often contain true statements and almost always contain statements that LOOK like true statements.
Since it has no inherent model of the world to draw on and only such statistical relationships you should check anything important
pyre@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
you say more accurate but all I see is a very roundabout way of saying fucking wrong all the goddamn time
zipzoopaboop@lemmynsfw.com 5 weeks ago
Maybe the owners of LLMs need to be held responsible for the problematic software they release
Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
There’s no problem here
Petter1@lemm.ee 5 weeks ago
Yea, I’m mind blown, how, after 3 years people still don’t know how to use LLM effectively in use cases they bring value (by reducing work time)
- start a second chat and ask different to verify
- if you use chatGPT reason feature, read reasoning output as well!
- best search for verifiable thing, like code, that you can run or similar
- if you use it for research, only trust the info, if it used web search and you have read the webpages it used to summarise as well, or use traditional web search to verify based on the output
- it is great to manipulate text until sounds as desired (if you are not good in wording stuff anyway)
- plan what steps to do in a project next (like “i want to do xxx have y and need it to be z, make me a list of todos)
- and of course it is great to generate simple python scripts fast (I often use it as my python writing slave)
Using AI like this, helped me enormously in work and live Like, I learned a lot C, C++, how linux kernel modules work, how PO/POT works, helped me with translations, introduced me into music production, helped me set up appFlowy and general windows/linux issues.
BakerBagel@midwest.social 5 weeks ago
So then what’s the use of the program if it uses a bunch of energy to just make shit up?
lime@feddit.nu 5 weeks ago
sometimes you need a machine that makes things up according to a given specification.
michaelmrose@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Because it makes up things that are 99% correct and in some areas the 99% + verification and expansion can be superior time wise to the 100% manual route
BakerBagel@midwest.social 5 weeks ago
What models are youseeing where things are 99% correct? Google’s search chat bot can’t even keep Windows vs Mac hotkey commands straight.
surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
And when it hallucinates harmful things, protections need to be put onto the output.
michaelmrose@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Ok so explain particularly what this means
surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
If you have a service, and that service is generating things that harm people, you should have to stop it.
BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
I have this gun machine that shoots in all directions randomly. I can’t predict it, so I can’t stop it from shooting you. So sorry. It’s uncontrollable.
I’m sorry, as an American, I’m not seeing the problem. Don’t you just need a second gun that shoots in random directions to stop the first gun? And then a third gun to shoot the 2nd gun? I mean come on now, this is basic 3rd grade common sense!
MagicShel@lemmy.zip 5 weeks ago
Yeah but I can just ignore the bullets because they are nerf. And I have my own nerf guns as well.
I mean at some point any analogy fails, but AI is nothing like a gun.
cecilkorik@lemmy.ca 5 weeks ago
They may seem like nerf when they first come out of the AI, but they turn into real bullets once they start filling people’s heads with convincing enough lies and falsehoods, and those people start wielding their own weapons against minorities, democracy, and the government. If the election of Trump 2.0 has not convinced you of the immense danger of disinformation and misinformation, I have literally no idea how anything could ever possibly get through to you.
MagicShel@lemmy.zip 5 weeks ago
That doesn’t really change anything. The internet is full of AI slip and just people outright lying. Nothing is reliable any more outside of the word of an actual expert.
This has been happening since before Trump. Hell Trump 45 was before the wave of truly capable AI.
AI doesn’t change this at all except people ought to know they are getting info from a bullshit source if they are getting it from AI themselves.
Probius@sopuli.xyz 5 weeks ago
Even nerf bullets can hurt you if they’re shot at you in sufficient quantities.
wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 weeks ago
Or speed. Some of the homebrew mods are ridiculous.
surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
AI is a thing people choose to host and are responsible for the outcomes of its use. The internal working and limitations of the machine do not make the owners less responsible.
MagicShel@lemmy.zip 5 weeks ago
Okay, so I agree with none of that, but you’re saying as long as we host our own AI or rent our own processing from the cloud we’re in the clear? I want to make sure that’s your fundamental argument because that leaves all open models in the clear and frankly I could be down with that. I like AI but I’m not a huge fan of AI companies.
SendPrudes@lemm.ee 5 weeks ago
So insurance companies use AI to screen claims.
It denies a claim for life saving intervention - person dies. Who is responsible for that? Historically it would be the insurance company - and worker. Would it be them or the AI company?
Psych screening tools were using it to pre screen calls.
Ai tells the person to kill themselves - who is at fault if they do it. Psych screener would lose their job and their license. What and who is impacted if AI does it.
QA check on a car or product is passed by AI but should have failed.
Thousands die before the recall. Who is at fault for it? The Company leveraging AI. Or the AI itself?
surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
I’m not sure you get my point.
If I’m proving a service, and that service is creating and publishing disparaging information about you, you should have recourse against me. I don’t get off the hook just because of the way I’ve set up the technology.