• theneverfox@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    Ok, seriously? Fuck this research. It’s bullshit.

    Want to know how I can declare that so confidently? Because I wrote a program called duo. It’s literally two chatbots instead of one, running locally on 5+ year old hardware. These are low powered llama’s fine tuned by the community for general purpose last year

    I just played a DND campaign with a chatbot and her hallucinated girlfriend (ai 1 wrote the prompt for AI 2, no edits or modifications). I’ve never played DND before, but they said they wanted to go to a haunted escape room. I have been to one of the most haunted locations in America, so I decided to be DM, and apparently they come with their own dice. Tomorrow I’m going to send the transcript to a friend who was looking for a DND player

    Yes, clickbait is terrible training data, and low grade LLMs can really pump it out.

    I had enough fun I fell asleep at my desk, and I did nothing but describe a location I’ve been to and the sounds I heard (and some urban legends)…I could spend a month and have replaced myself in the experience.

    Other times I’ve let them run with no interaction on my part they’ve hallucinated (feasible) apps I’m not making to the point I could throw it into a design document, and games good enough to land on my to-do list.

    Why don’t people see this for the miracle technology this is? If it isn’t reliable on one pass, do a second to evaluate the first, another to run chain of thought on problem areas, another one to flesh it out and rinse and repeat if you need to.

    This is such a simple engineering problem it’s not even funny