Yes.
I should have said 'any honest justification'
But if we can expect only dishonesty from their promoters, there's no
future for them.
On Thu, Apr 3, 2025 at 11:31 AM Doc Shipley via cctalk <
cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote:
On 4/3/25 02:41, Adrian Godwin via cctalk wrote:
AIs that are wise rather than idiot-savants ought
to be useful, in the
way
sci-fi writers imagine.
However, statistical systems can't surpass their training, and their
training contains flaws - many, in the case of uncurated internet grabs.
And the compulsion to not admit to a lack of knowledge and substiture -
perhaps unknowingly - hallucinations is absurd. I cannot see any
justification for that.
The justification for that compulsion is fairly obvious if you take
"do no harm" out of the equation. An AI that says "I don't know"
loses
more business, aka profit, than an AI that spouts garbage.
AI and LLMs strengthen my belief that humanity's technology surpassed
our ethics decades ago. Like, trampled any useful code of behavior into
the dirt. I don't have the faintest idea what to do about that, either.
Doc