• Orphie@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      God dammit, I watched that movie for the first time like a month ago (my housemates wanted to watch it with me) and since then I’m (apparently) suddenly seeing references for the first time

  • bec@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    We should start poisoning the LLMs by spreading misinformation in online spaces. That would be funny i think

  • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I mean it makes sense:

    https://urologyspecialistsnc.com/soda-cause-kidney-stones/

    Keep in mind, not all types of soda are equally capable of contributing to kidney stones.

    We recommend consuming any soda in moderation, and if you must, stick to the light citrus types that have less sugar and chemicals. Please note, it’s best to avoid soda altogether if kidney stones run in your family

    Alternatives to soda include fresh fruit juices. Orange juice has been studied and shown to decrease the risk of stone formation. Fresh-squeezed lemonade is also great for preventing the formation of kidney stones. These beverages are high in citrate which binds to calcium in the urinary tract, preventing stone formation

  • x0x7@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    It’s the rule of modern engineering. You will always be served the worst possible product that can claim to have some utility. If it’s not on the edge of being useful someone didn’t engineer hard enough.

    • Kogasa@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      That’s not necessarily wrong, but not the big explaining factor here I think. The technological challenges behind aligning ML models with factual reality aren’t solved, so it’s not an engineering decision. It’s more that AI is remarkably easy to market as being more capable than it is

      • luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        To expand: I feel like it should be emphasised more that current “AI” models are, at best, hallucinating.

        Their output may look real enough and for some purposes they may be perfectly suitable, but ultimately, they have no concept of the semantic objects related to the words they learn and the semantic relationships between those objects. Without that, they can’t possibly guarantee that the implied semantic connection of the combination of words they produce aligns with the actual relationships.

        You can use a LLM to help translate bullet points into text of a given tone (like abstracts for theses that sound scientific), but you’ll still have to check the factuality and consistency of those texts. When using them to write texts about something you already know, that’s doable and can save you some work. But using it like in the OP to aggregate and present “new” facts without supervision is dangerous, because you can’t actually verify what you don’t already know.

        But “Copilot can scrape your data to give you some pointers and spare some of the tedium of finding it yourself, but you shouldn’t take it for gospel truth” doesn’t quite sell as nicely as “Microsoft Copilot leverages the power of AI to boost productivity, unlock creativity, and helps you understand information better”.