Comment on Zuckerberg hailed AI ‘superintelligence’. Then his smart glasses failed on stage | Matthew Cantor

• snooggums@piefed.world ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Look, two Rs is accurate as long as you accept that AI knows 'what you really mean' and you should have just prompted better.

  source

  • SketchySeaBeast@lemmy.ca ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    That drives me mad. “Oh, you don’t find AI that useful for developement? You should learn how to talk to it.”. Wasn’t that the point, that it would understand me?

    source

    • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Meh, that was the sales pitch. But name one tool in development that actually does what the sales pitch claimed. Knowing how to get useful info out of AI does involve knowing how to talk to it. Just like getting the most out of gitlab means knowing how they intend for you to organize your jobs. So AI is just like every other tool, overhyped, underdelivering, and has “some” use.

      source

      • msage@programming.dev ⁨12⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Git and even GitLab does its job quite well.

        IDEs do A LOT of heavy lifting for many devs.

        AI was supposed to boost productivity and eventually replace developers altogether.

        One of those things is not like the otters.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works ⁨20⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  300?

  source

  • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    It’s that or Over 9000!!!

    source
• iopq@lemmy.world ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Image

  source

  • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    How many pounds of carbon did that answer produce?

    source
  • renrenPDX@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    There are no “R”'s (capital r) in strawberry.

    source

    • iopq@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      R and r are the same letter. You can tell because a word that starts with r can be written with R at the start of the sentence

      source
• circuscritic@lemmy.ca ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Ask the model to confirm the answer and it will correct itself, at least when I’ve tried that.

  I’m sure there’s a mathematical or programmatic logic as to why, but seeing as I don’t need LLM’s to count letters, I’m not overly interested in it.

  Regardless, I look forward to the bubble popping.

  source

  • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    I don’t need LLM’s to count letters

    If I can’t rely on a system to perform simple tasks I can easily validate, I’m not sure why I’d trust it to perform complex tasks I would struggle to verify.

    Imagine a calculator that reported “1+1=3”. It seems silly to use such a machine to do long division.

    source

    • circuscritic@lemmy.ca ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      That’s my point, I don’t use LLMs for those operations, and I’m aware of their faults, but that doesn’t mean they’re useless.

      So yeah, I look forward to the AI bubble popping, but I’m still going to use LLMs for type of tasks they’re actually suited for.

      I don’t think many people on Lemmy are under the the spell of AI hype, but plenty of people here are knowledgeable enough to know when, and when not, to leverage this useful, but dangerously overhyped and oversold, piece of technology.

      source
    • iopq@lemmy.world ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      A Math PhD will eventually make a simple arithmetic mistake if you ask them to do enough problems. That doesn’t invalidate more difficult proofs they have published in papers

      source

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        A Math PhD will eventually make a simple arithmetic mistake if you ask them to do enough problems.

        Which is why we don’t designate a single Math PhD as a definitive source for all mathematical wisdom.

        That doesn’t invalidate more difficult proofs

        If I’m handed a proof with a simple arithmetic mistake in the logic, that absolutely invalidates it

        source

        • -> View More Comments