this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
35 points (94.9% liked)

Asklemmy

43851 readers
743 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
35
... (programming.dev)
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by CoderSupreme@programming.dev to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Contramuffin@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Slightly overblown. Don't get me wrong, it's a powerful tool. But it's just a tool. It's not some sort of sentient being. In my field of work (research), we found out pretty quickly that ChatGPT was virtually worthless, since the stuff that we were doing was so new and novel that ChatGPT hasn't got training data on it yet. But you could use it as a glorified Google and ask it questions if there was some part of the protocol that you didn't understand. And honestly that pretty much encapsulates my stance on the matter: good at rehashing and summarizing old information, but terrible at generating or organizing new information.

Honestly, what I'm worried about is that the hype around AI is causing too many people to have an over-reliance on AI, and not realizing the limitations until it's too late. A good example would be the case that was on the news a month or two ago about the lawyer who got in trouble because he used ChatGPT to write his case for him and it ended up making up court cases for citations. Suppose if some company puts an LLM as its CEO (which I feel fairly confident that some techbro is doing somewhere in the world). The company may be able to coast during fair weather and times of good business, but I am concerned that things will crash and burn when things aren't going well. And I think that's really the crux of it - AI is good enough that it looks competent when it's not being stretched to its limits. And that's leading too many people to think that AI is competent, always.