345
AP Shares Guidelines Prohibiting Staff From Using AI to Write Publishable Content (gizmodo.com)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
35 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 3 years ago (1 child)

I understand they are just fancy text prediction algorithms, which is probably justa as much as you do (if you are a machine learning expert, I do apologise). Still, the good ones that get their data from the internet rarely make mistakes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child)

    I'm not an ML expert but we've been using them for a while in neurosciences (software dev in bioinformatics). They are impressive, but have no semantics, no logics. It's just a fancy mirror. That's why, for example, world of warcraft player have been able to trick those bots into making an article about a feature that doesn't exist.

    Do you really want to lose your time reading a blob of data with no coherency?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 years ago

    Do you really want to lose your time reading a blob of data with no coherency?

    We are both on the internet, lol. And I mean it. LLMs are slightly worse than the CEO-optimized clickbaity word salad you get in most articles. Before you've found out how\where to search for direct and correct answers, it would be just the same or maybe worse. <– I found this skill a bit fascinating, that we learn to read patterns and red flags without even opening a page. I doubt it's possible to make a reliable model with that bullshit detector.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent