▲ 25 ▼ How often do you have conversations with an LLM AI (ChatGPT, Gemini, etc?) (lemmy.world) submitted 2 years ago by dominiquec@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.world 35 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] loaExMachina@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago (1 child) asking them factual questions is a bad idea This is a crucial point that everybody should make sure their non-techie friends understand. AI is not good at facts. AI is primarily a bullshitter. They are really only useful where facts don't matter, like planning events, finding ways to spend time, creating art, etc.. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] subignition@fedia.io 2 points 2 years ago* (1 child) If you're prepared to fact check what it gives you, it can still be a pretty useful tool for breaking down unfamiliar things or for brainstorming. And I'm saying that as someone with a very realistic/concerned view about its limitations. Used it earlier this week as a jumping off point for troubleshooting a problem I was having with the USMT in Windows 11. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* Absolutely. With code (and I suppose it's of other logical truths) it's easier because you can ask it to write a test for the code, though the test may be invalid so you have to check that. With arbitrary facts, I usually ask "is that true?" To have it check itself. Sometimes it just gets into a loop of lies, but other times it actually does tell the truth. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago (1 child) asking them factual questions is a bad idea This is a crucial point that everybody should make sure their non-techie friends understand. AI is not good at facts. AI is primarily a bullshitter. They are really only useful where facts don't matter, like planning events, finding ways to spend time, creating art, etc.. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] subignition@fedia.io 2 points 2 years ago* (1 child) If you're prepared to fact check what it gives you, it can still be a pretty useful tool for breaking down unfamiliar things or for brainstorming. And I'm saying that as someone with a very realistic/concerned view about its limitations. Used it earlier this week as a jumping off point for troubleshooting a problem I was having with the USMT in Windows 11. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* Absolutely. With code (and I suppose it's of other logical truths) it's easier because you can ask it to write a test for the code, though the test may be invalid so you have to check that. With arbitrary facts, I usually ask "is that true?" To have it check itself. Sometimes it just gets into a loop of lies, but other times it actually does tell the truth. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] subignition@fedia.io 2 points 2 years ago* (1 child) If you're prepared to fact check what it gives you, it can still be a pretty useful tool for breaking down unfamiliar things or for brainstorming. And I'm saying that as someone with a very realistic/concerned view about its limitations. Used it earlier this week as a jumping off point for troubleshooting a problem I was having with the USMT in Windows 11. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* Absolutely. With code (and I suppose it's of other logical truths) it's easier because you can ask it to write a test for the code, though the test may be invalid so you have to check that. With arbitrary facts, I usually ask "is that true?" To have it check itself. Sometimes it just gets into a loop of lies, but other times it actually does tell the truth. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* Absolutely. With code (and I suppose it's of other logical truths) it's easier because you can ask it to write a test for the code, though the test may be invalid so you have to check that. With arbitrary facts, I usually ask "is that true?" To have it check itself. Sometimes it just gets into a loop of lies, but other times it actually does tell the truth. permalink fedilink source parent