• 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 🇮
    link
    fedilink
    English
    0
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    It’s just semantics in this case. Catloaf’s argument is entirely centered around the definition of the word “lie,” and while I agree with that, most people will understand the intent behind the usage in the context it is being used in. AI does not tell the truth. AI is not necessarily accurate. AI “lies.”

    • @SanguineBrah@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      06 months ago

      The language we use is quite important here because if we as a society value truth as a goal, the general public need to be made aware that these systems are truth-agnostic and that any truthfulness is merely a byproduct of stringing related tokens together. There is a word for assertions that don’t have any regard for the truth in the philosophical literature: bullshit. If this, more precise, language was widespread in regard to AI we might prevent future pollution of the truth as these systems become more widespread.

    • snooggums
      link
      fedilink
      English
      06 months ago

      AI returns incorrect results.

      In this case semantics matter because using terms like halluilcinations, lies, honesty, and all the other anthromorphic bullshit is designed to make people think neural networks are far more advanced than they actually are.

      • FaceDeer
        link
        fedilink
        06 months ago

        It’s not “anthropomorphic bullshit”, it’s technical jargon that you’re not understanding because you’re applying the wrong context to the definitions. AI researchers use terms like “hallucination” to mean specific AI behaviours, they use it in their scientific papers all the time.

      • thedruid
        link
        fedilink
        English
        06 months ago

        Nn. It’s to make people who don’t understand llms be cautious in placing their trust in them. To communicate that clearly, language that is understandable to people who don’t understand llms need to be used.

        I can’t believe this Is the supposed high level of discourse on lemmy

        • @FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          0
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          I can’t believe this Is the supposed high level of discourse on lemmy

          Lemmy users and AI have a lot of things in common, like being confidently incorrect and making things up to further their point. AI at least agrees and apologises when you point out that it’s wrong, it doesn’t double down and cry to the mods to get you banned.

          • thedruid
            link
            fedilink
            English
            06 months ago

            I know. it would be a lot better world if a. I apologists could just admit they are wrong

            But nah. They better than others.