Comment on AI agents wrong ~70% of time: Carnegie Mellon study
outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month agoIt cant do 30% of tasks vorrectly. It can do tasks correctly as much as 30% of the time, and since it’s llm shit you know those numbers have been more massaged than any human in history has ever been.
jsomae@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
I meant the latter, not “it can do 30% of tasks correctly 100% of the time.”
outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
You get how that’s fucking useless, generally?
jsomae@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
yes, that’s generally useless. It should not be shoved down people’s throats. 30% accuracy still has its uses, especially if the result can be programmatically verified.
Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Run something with a 70% failure rate 10x and you get to a cumulative 98% pass rate. LLMs don’t get tired and they can be run in parallel.
outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
Less broadly useful than 20 tons of mixed texture human shit.
MangoCats@feddit.it 1 month ago
As useless as a cubicle farm full of unsupervised workers.
outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
Tjose are people who could be living their li:es, pursuing their ambitions, whatever. That could get some shit done. Comparison not valid.