undefined | Better HN

0 pointsbigbadfeline26d ago0 comments

> You gave it capability to delete emails. Why did you expect it not to do that at least some of the time?

Because of the I in AI of course. Would you call it false advertisement and go after the providers?

0 comments

This reminds of the conversation the other day about the deleted production database at railway. "this person obviously didn't follow best practice of being hyper distrusting of LLM agents", and the response "yeah but every company is marketing it as safe. someone is gonna fall for it".

kryogen1c26d ago

(Well-regulated) free markets are sort of built on the principle of educated consumerism. Your choice matters; its not up to the government to make illegal every non-optimal product. However, we do expect some minimum level of safety.

What does that mean for llms? Their nondeterminism does seem to incline them toward a legal safety requirement. Can you buy a fire extinguisher that 1/1000 times burns your house down? Or can your car brakes instead increase acceleration in rare cases?

Im using llms much more than i used to, but i still cant shake the fundamental stochastic nature of the technology.

cheschire26d ago

Wherever I'm going, I'll be there to apply the formula. I'll keep the secret intact. It's simple arithmetic. It's a story problem. If a new car built by my company leaves Chicago traveling west at 60 miles per hour, and the rear differential locks up, and the car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside, does my company initiate a recall? You take the population of vehicles in the field (A) and multiple it by the probable rate of failure (B), then multiply the result by the average cost of an out-of-court settlement (C). A times B times C equals X. This is what it will cost if we don't initiate a recall. If X is greater than the cost of a recall, we recall the cars and no one gets hurt. If X is less than the cost of a recall, then we don't recall.

Chuck Palahniuk, Fight Club

yuliyp26d ago

But intelligent beings are fundamentally fallible? That's kind of the nature of doing leaps of reasoning: sometimes those leaps are amazing, sometimes they're wrong. It's what's advertised.

pjc5026d ago

You could do a whole thesis on how industrialization and the invention of bureaucracy are efforts to get reproducible results out of fallible humans.

We don't yet have the luxury of several thousand years of work trying to get LLMs to be less fallible.

bigbadfelineOP26d ago

> But intelligent beings are fundamentally fallible?

Not fundamentally, only until they're compelled to learn from it. The current crop of AI understands neither compelling nor learning.

bdangubic26d ago

I is in the I of the beholder :)

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse