• anus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    I would argue that you’ve clearly formed your opinion without spending significant time giving foundational LLMs a chance

    • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Nah, more that I forget how dumb people can be sometimes: I was reminded recently that there’s plenty of examples of people spouting LLM-like answers; but I still contend that even most people, trusted in their proper areas, talk with meaning and comprehension.

      As to LLMs, perhaps I haven’t given them enough chance. But I have experimented a while myself, read reports of others, and delved into the understanding of how their mathematical models work. So I’m not exactly clueless.

      • anus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        That’s impressive for someone who seems clueless

        I would encourage you to give foundational large models a chance

        I think you’ll find that (barring intentionally subversive inputs) the largest and most powerful models basically don’t hallucinate

        O1 in particular is better than humans in my experience