▲ 538 ▼ 'Big Short' Investor Expects AI Bubble Burst 'Sooner Than Later' (gizmodo.com) submitted 2 weeks ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world 208 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 26 points 2 weeks ago (8 children) I popped the email into chatgpt and asked if it wrote that email and it said it did, lol It doesn't work that way tho permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [+] Kcap@lemmy.world -7 points 2 weeks ago (7 children) I mean, it literally does though. The email sounded phony AF, especially knowing that the person's first language isn't English and it was overly proper sounding. I copy and pasted it into chatgpt and said "did you write this email?“ and it's response was" yes, based on the writing style and phrasing, I wrote this content." permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] dhork@lemmy.world 29 points 2 weeks ago I've been using ChatGPT a bit at work lately, since they've already paid for the subscription for everyone. I've learned that it is a bad idea to ask it any leading question, because it is likely to just give you the answer you want to hear. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Reality@feddit.org 28 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Someone put in the intro to the book Frankenstein into an ai checker and it confirmed it to be 100 percent written by an LLM. It's not deterministic. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mattyroses@lemmy.today 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) It's not deterministic. This is the first thing about LLMs always, and what most people can't seem to understand. LLMs are a thing where you give an input and get an output, and it happens to correspond to reality much of the time. But there's no actual understanding there. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Reality@feddit.org 1 point 1 week ago Exactly why it needs code to enforce repetitive results. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) It does not remember things it made, so no. It doesn't work that way. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] ReluctantMuskrat@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago It doesn't remember but that won't keep it from answering a question as to whether it thinks an email was AI generated. It'll also be happy to confidently answer a question with a wrong answer to. permalink fedilink source parent [–] kinship@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 2 weeks ago Doesn't work that way. Only if they programmed LLMs to sign the work like using a hash you would be able to confirm or deny with 100% accuracy permalink fedilink source parent
[+] Kcap@lemmy.world -7 points 2 weeks ago (7 children) I mean, it literally does though. The email sounded phony AF, especially knowing that the person's first language isn't English and it was overly proper sounding. I copy and pasted it into chatgpt and said "did you write this email?“ and it's response was" yes, based on the writing style and phrasing, I wrote this content." permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 7 child comments replies: [–] dhork@lemmy.world 29 points 2 weeks ago I've been using ChatGPT a bit at work lately, since they've already paid for the subscription for everyone. I've learned that it is a bad idea to ask it any leading question, because it is likely to just give you the answer you want to hear. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Reality@feddit.org 28 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Someone put in the intro to the book Frankenstein into an ai checker and it confirmed it to be 100 percent written by an LLM. It's not deterministic. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mattyroses@lemmy.today 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) It's not deterministic. This is the first thing about LLMs always, and what most people can't seem to understand. LLMs are a thing where you give an input and get an output, and it happens to correspond to reality much of the time. But there's no actual understanding there. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Reality@feddit.org 1 point 1 week ago Exactly why it needs code to enforce repetitive results. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) It does not remember things it made, so no. It doesn't work that way. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] ReluctantMuskrat@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago It doesn't remember but that won't keep it from answering a question as to whether it thinks an email was AI generated. It'll also be happy to confidently answer a question with a wrong answer to. permalink fedilink source parent [–] kinship@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 2 weeks ago Doesn't work that way. Only if they programmed LLMs to sign the work like using a hash you would be able to confirm or deny with 100% accuracy permalink fedilink source parent
[–] dhork@lemmy.world 29 points 2 weeks ago I've been using ChatGPT a bit at work lately, since they've already paid for the subscription for everyone. I've learned that it is a bad idea to ask it any leading question, because it is likely to just give you the answer you want to hear. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Reality@feddit.org 28 points 2 weeks ago (2 children) Someone put in the intro to the book Frankenstein into an ai checker and it confirmed it to be 100 percent written by an LLM. It's not deterministic. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mattyroses@lemmy.today 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) It's not deterministic. This is the first thing about LLMs always, and what most people can't seem to understand. LLMs are a thing where you give an input and get an output, and it happens to correspond to reality much of the time. But there's no actual understanding there. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Reality@feddit.org 1 point 1 week ago Exactly why it needs code to enforce repetitive results. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mattyroses@lemmy.today 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) It's not deterministic. This is the first thing about LLMs always, and what most people can't seem to understand. LLMs are a thing where you give an input and get an output, and it happens to correspond to reality much of the time. But there's no actual understanding there. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Reality@feddit.org 1 point 1 week ago Exactly why it needs code to enforce repetitive results. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Reality@feddit.org 1 point 1 week ago Exactly why it needs code to enforce repetitive results. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 10 points 2 weeks ago (1 child) It does not remember things it made, so no. It doesn't work that way. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] ReluctantMuskrat@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago It doesn't remember but that won't keep it from answering a question as to whether it thinks an email was AI generated. It'll also be happy to confidently answer a question with a wrong answer to. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ReluctantMuskrat@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago It doesn't remember but that won't keep it from answering a question as to whether it thinks an email was AI generated. It'll also be happy to confidently answer a question with a wrong answer to. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kinship@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 2 weeks ago Doesn't work that way. Only if they programmed LLMs to sign the work like using a hash you would be able to confirm or deny with 100% accuracy permalink fedilink source parent