AI cat
category: general [glöplog]
The AIs could just prefix every answer with "I'm not sure, but this is what a friend of mine told me" and postfix with IIRC
Quote:
If I am not mistaken, something similar has been demonstrated about humans. ;)
This is the article I was referring to.
I bet if I asked you to do math in your head, and you are an honest person, you will memorize and explain your process faithfully. For example, when I was trying to add 24 and 36, I first added tens (2+3) and got 50, then I added 4+6 and got 10 and added it to 50 and 10 to get 60. Humans can actually verbalize it (or visualize if you are visual thinker) in their head while doing it. The problem is Claude can't.
There are definitely deeper thinking patterns that are more "subconscious" (not verbalized or visualized) for humans too. Then, of course, you won't be able to explain your thinking process.
@Optimus:
To me it’s not impressive at all. In fact it’s a dangerous glitch that spells doom for this tech. Perhaps wider doom if they try to keep it hush. We need no extensive research to witness this manifested. ChatGPT would say anything for an applause. Anything. So, when confronted with questions about origins of its previous answers, it will willingly make up quotes from nonexistent “historical” events, nonexistent research papers etc. This behaviour manifested mostly in law. On several occasions it dreamed up past lawcases that never happened. This ended up in courts, causing major embarassment for lawyers using it without doublechecking its output, baffling judges and jurys. The more they try to get rid of this behaviour, the more “aligning” human hours they have to sink into it. Chasing their tails. Up until now this glitch was not remedied and I don’t think it can be remedied, which is (in my opinion) the main reason they are steering it towards art (music, pictures, videos) instead of critical stuff that needs to be strictly precise, exact, factual.
To me it’s not impressive at all. In fact it’s a dangerous glitch that spells doom for this tech. Perhaps wider doom if they try to keep it hush. We need no extensive research to witness this manifested. ChatGPT would say anything for an applause. Anything. So, when confronted with questions about origins of its previous answers, it will willingly make up quotes from nonexistent “historical” events, nonexistent research papers etc. This behaviour manifested mostly in law. On several occasions it dreamed up past lawcases that never happened. This ended up in courts, causing major embarassment for lawyers using it without doublechecking its output, baffling judges and jurys. The more they try to get rid of this behaviour, the more “aligning” human hours they have to sink into it. Chasing their tails. Up until now this glitch was not remedied and I don’t think it can be remedied, which is (in my opinion) the main reason they are steering it towards art (music, pictures, videos) instead of critical stuff that needs to be strictly precise, exact, factual.
