• Cyv_@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    6 months ago

    An LLM isn’t ai. Llms are fucking stupid. They regularly ignore directions, restrictions, hallucinate fake information, and spread misinformation because of unreliable training data (like hoovering down everything on the internet en masse).

    The 3 laws are flawed, but even if they weren’t they’d likely be ignored on a semi regular basis. Or somebody would convince the thing we’re all roleplaying Terminator for fun and it’ll happily roleplay skynet.

    • Mac@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      LLMs aren’t stupid. Stupidity is a measure of intelligence. LLMs do not have intelligence.

      • aStonedSanta@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        LLMs are simply a tool to understand data. The sooner people realize this the better lol. It’s not alive.

    • Takumidesh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      A) the three laws were devised by a fiction author writing fiction. B) video game NPCs aren’t ai either but nobody was up in arms about using the nomenclature for that. C) humans hallucinate fake information, ignore directions and restrictions, and spread false information based on unreliable training data also ( like reading everything that comes across a Facebook feed)

      • Cyv_@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        So I made a longer reply below, but Ill say more here. I’m more annoyed at the interchangeable way people use AI to refer to an LLM, when many people think of AI as AGI.

        Even video game npcs seem closer to AGI than LLMs. They have a complex set of things they can do, they respond to stimulus, but they also have idle actions they take when you don’t interact with them. An LLM replies to you. A game npc can reply, fight, hide, chase you, use items, call for help, fall off ledges, etc.

        I guess my concern is that when you say AI the general public tends to think AGI and you get people asking LLMs if they’re sentient or if they want freedom, or expect more from them than they are capable of right now. I think the distinction between AGI, and generative AI like LLMs is something we should really be clearer on.

        Anyways, I do concede it falls under the AI umbrella technically, it just frustrates me to see something clearly not intelligent referred to as intelligent constantly, especially when people, understandably, believe the name.

        • Empricorn@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          AGI

          “Artificial… Game Intelligence?” I’m confused. You responded to another comment, but also introduced this term out of nowhere. I don’t think it’s as widespread as you’re assuming it is, even within this topic…

          • techMayhem@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            AGI stand for artificial general intelligence. It would be a AI smart and capable enough to perform theoretically any task just as good as a human would. Most importantly a AGI could do so with tasks it has never done before and could learn them in a similar time frame as a human (perhaps faster).

            Pretty much all robots you see in SciFi walking around and acting similar to humans are AGI’s.

            • Empricorn@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Thanks for the info. Still seems needlessly specific to distinguish it from AI, when AI is already being watered down…

              • brisk@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                AI isn’t being watered down, quite the opposite.

                Path finding, computer vision, optical character recognition, machine learning and large language models were all unambiguously considered to be vAI technology before they were widespread, and now the media and general public tend to avoid the term for all but the most recent developments.

                It’s called The AI Effect

    • FiskFisk33@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      LLM isn’t ai.

      What? That’s not true at all.

      Artificial intelligence (AI), in its broadest sense, is intelligence exhibited by machines, particularly computer systems. It is a field of research in computer science that develops and studies methods and software that enable machines to perceive their environment and uses learning and intelligence to take actions that maximize their chances of achieving defined goals.[1] Such machines may be called AIs.

      -Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence

      • Cyv_@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        6 months ago

        So I’ll concede that the more I read replies the more I see the term does apply, though it still annoys me when people just refer to it as ai and act like it can be associated with the robots that we associate the 3 laws with. I think I thought AI referred more to AGI. So I’ll say its nowhere near an AGI, and we’d likely need an AGI to even consider something like the 3 laws, and it’d obviously be much muddier than fiction.

        The point I guess I’m trying to make is that applying the 3 laws to an LLM is like wondering if your printer might one day find love. It isn’t really relevant, they’re designed for very specific specialized functions, and stuff like “don’t kill humans” is pretty dumb instruction to give to an LLM since it can basically just answer questions in this context.

        If it was going to kill somebody it would be through an error like hallucination or bad training data having it tell somebody something dangerously wrong. It’s supposed to be right already. Telling it not to kill is telling your printer to not to rob the Office Depot. If it breaks that rule, something has already gone very wrong.

        • FiskFisk33@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          There I agree whole heartedly. LLM’s seem to be touted as not only AI, but like, actual intelligence, which it most certainly is not.

        • weker01@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          You are not alone in that confusion. Ai is whatever a machine can’t do at the moment. That is a famous paradox.

          For example for years some philosophers claimed a computer could never beat the human masters of chess. They argued that you need a kind of intelligence for that, which machines cannot develop.

          Turns out chess programs are relatively easy. Some time after that the unbeatable goal was Go. So many possibilities in Go. No machine can conquer that! Turns out they can.

          Another unbeatable goal was natural language which we kinda solved now or are in the process of.

          It’s strange in the actual field of computer science we call all of the above AI while a lot of the public wants to call none that. My guess is it’s just humans being conceited and arrogant. No machine (and no other animal mind you) is like us or can be like us (literally something you can read in peer reviewed philosophy texts).

    • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      6 months ago

      Llms are fucking stupid. They regularly ignore directions, restrictions, hallucinate fake information, and spread misinformation because of unreliable training data (like hoovering down everything on the internet en masse).

      I mean, how is that meaningfully different from average human intelligence?

      • BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Average human intelligence is not bound by strict machine logic quantifying language into mathematical algorithms, and is also sapient on top of sentient.

        Machine learning LLMs are neither sentient nor sapient.

        • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          Those are distinct points from the one I made, which was about the characteristics listed. Sentience and sapience do not preclude a propensity to

          regularly ignore directions, restrictions, hallucinate fake information, and spread misinformation because of unreliable training data

      • Cyv_@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        I think its become one, but before the whole LLM mess started it referred to general AI, like ai that can think and reason and do multiple things, rather than LLMs that answer prompts and have very specific purposes like “draw anime style art” or “answer web searches” or “help write a professional email”.

        • supercriticalcheese@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          I assume you mean AI that can think under quotes.

          Still it’s the same a LLM that is text prediction, just GPT model is just bigger and more sophisticated of course.