New warning as AI suddenly targets billions of private messages on smartphones…
You must log in or register to comment.
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn’t great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don’t promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
- 0 users online
- 57 users / day
- 383 users / week
- 1.5K users / month
- 5.7K users / 6 months
- 1 subscriber
- 3.12K Posts
- 78K Comments
- Modlog
What the actual fuck.
I’m tired of constantly running in to the basic lack of understanding that LLMs are not knowledge systems. They emulate language, and produce plausible sentences. This journalist is using the output of a LLM as a source of knowledge… What a fucking disgrace this should be for Forbes.
Imagine a journalist just quoting a conversation with their 10 year old, where they played a game of “whatever you do, you have to pretend like you really know what you’re talking about. Do not be unsure about anything, ok?”, and used the output as a source for actual facts.
If you use ChatGPT, or Bard, or any LLM for anything beyond creative output, or with the required comprehension to vet the output, just stop. Don’t use tools you don’t understand the function or limitations of.
I’ve already had to spend hours correcting a fundamental misconception someone got from ChatGPT, which was part of a safety mechanism of medical software. I’ve also had the displeasure of finding self-contradicting documentation someone placed in a README, which was a copy-paste from ChatGPT.
It’s such a powerful tool and utility if you know what it can help with. But it requires a basic understanding, that too many people are either too lazy to make the effort for, or just lacking critical thought processes, and “it sounded really plausible”, (the full extent of what it’s designed to do) fools them completely.
LMAO I opened the link expecting an article, and I got a steady flow of quotations, but nothing to indicate who is being quoted. At the very end, the sentence “For its part, Bard states…” is used, and I can think of no clearer way to display your fundamental misunderstanding of AI. Bard can’t “state” shit in any official capacity. Bard is the same caliber of LLM as GPT, and both have a documented tendency to hallucinate.
It’s all hallucinations, always, with only a few exceptions. The hallucinations just have some overlap with reality, that’s all.
You are correct, I too tend to humanize LLMs to some degree.