1266
How to clean a rescued pigeon (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world
136 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 17 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (25 children)

Pigeon = edible bird

Cleaning a bird > preparing a bird after killing it (hunting term)

AI figured the "rescued" part was either a mistake or that the person wanted to eat a bird they rescued

If you make a research for "how to clean a dirty bird" you give it better context and it comes up with a better reply

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 25 child comments
    •
  • [–] 23 points 2 years ago* (6 children)

    The context is clear to a human. If an LLM is giving advice to everybody who asks a question in Google, it needs to do a much better job at giving responses.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [+] -10 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    Nah, the ai did a great job. People need to assume murder/hunting is the default more often.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    Or, hear me out, there was NO figuring of any kind, just some magic LLM autocomplete bullshit. How hard is this to understand?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    It's a turn of phrase lol

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (2 children)

    I have to disagree with that. To quote the comment I replied to:

    AI figured the “rescued” part was either a mistake or that the person wanted to eat a bird they rescued

    Where's the "turn of phrase" in this, lol? It could hardly read any more clearly that they assume this "AI" can "figure" stuff out, which is simply false for LLMs. I'm not trying to attack anyone here, but spreading misinformation is not ok.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    I'll be the first one to explain to people that AI as we know it is just pattern recognition, so yeah, it was a turn of phrase, thanks for your concern.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    You say this like human "figuring" isn't some "autocomplete bullshit".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You can play with words all you like, but that's not going to change the fact that LLMs fail at reasoning. See this Wired article, for example.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    My point wasn't that LLMs are capable of reasoning. My point was that the human capacity for reasoning is grossly overrated.

    The core of human reasoning is simple pattern matching: regurgitating what we have previously observed. That's what LLMs do well.

    LLMs are basically at the toddler stage of development, but with an extraordinary vocabulary.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I thought AI was great at picking up context?

    I don't know why you thought that. LLMs split your question into separate words and assigns scores to those words, then looks up answers relevant to those words. It has no idea of how those words are relevant to each other. That's why LLMs couldn't answer how many "r"s are in "strawberry". They assigned the word "strawberry" a lower relevancy score in that question. The word "rescue" is probably treated the same way here.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    But it said pigeons are usually clean.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    Bought in a grocery store - see squab - they are usually clean and prepped for cooking. So while the de-boning instructions were not good, the AI wasn't technically wrong.

    But while a human can make the same mistake and many here just assume the question was about how to wash a rescued pigeon - maybe that's not the original intent - what human can do that AI cannot is to ask for clarification to the original question and intent of the question. We do this kind of thing every day.

    At the very best, AI can only supply multiple different answers if a poorly worded question is asked or it misunderstands something in the original question, (they seem to be very bad at even that or simply can't do it at all). And we would need to be able to choose the correct answer from several provided.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent