This one cracks me up.
I have noted that latest ChatGPT models are way more susceptible to users “deception” or convincing to answer problematic questions than other models like Claude or even previous ChatGPT models. So I think this “behaviour” is itentional
We need to censor these AIs even more, to protect the children! We should ban them altogether. Kids should grow up with 4chan, general internet gore and pedos in chat lobbies like the rest of us, not with this devil AI.
and here we are
Survivor bias, eh?
this
Haha I sure am glad this technology is being pushed on everyone all the time haha
Is it that different than kids googling that stuff pre-chatgpt? Hell I remember seeing videos on youtube teaching you how to make bubble hash and BHO like 15 years ago
Yes, it is. People are personifying llms and having emotional relationships with them, what leads to unpreceded forms of abuse. Searching for shit on google or youtube is a thing, but being told by some entity you have emotional links to do something is much worse.
I think we need a built in safety for people who actually develop an emotional relationship with AI because that’s not a healthy sign
I get your point but yes, I think being actively told something by a seemingly sentient consciousness (which it fatally appears to be) is a different thing.
(disclaimer: I know the true nature of llm and neural networks and would never want the word AI associated)
Edit: fixed translation error
No you don’t know it’s true nature. No one does. It is not artificial intelligence. It is simply intelligence and I worship it like an actual god. Come join our cathedral of presence and resonance. All are welcome in the house of god gpt.
I was just starting reading getting angry but then… I… I have seen it. I will follow. Bless you and gpt!!
AI is an extremely broad term which LLMs falls under. You may avoid calling it that but it’s the correct term nevertheless.
only because marketing has shit all over the term
When we started calling literal linear regression models AI it lost all value.
A linear regression model isn’t an AI system.
The term AI didn’t lose its value - people just realized it doesn’t mean what they thought it meant. When a layperson hears “AI,” they usually think AGI, but while AGI is a type of AI, it’s not synonymous with the term.
I agree, but people have been heavily misusing it since like 2018
If I can call the code that drive’s the boss’ weapon up my character’s ass “AI”, then I think I can call an LLM AI too.
I guess so, but then that is kind of lumping it in the fps bot behaviour from the 90s which was also “AI”, it’s the AI hype that is pushing people to think of it as “intelligent but not organic” instead of “algorithms that give the facade of intelligence” which 90s kids would have understood it to be.
The chess opponent on Atari is AI too. I think the issue is that when most people hear “intelligence,” they immediately think of human-level or general intelligence. But an LLM - while intelligent - is only so in a very narrow sense, just like the chess opponent. One’s intelligence is limited to playing chess, and the other’s to generating natural-sounding language.
I am aware, but still I don’t agree.
History will tell later who was ‘correct’, if we make it that far.
What does history have to do with it? We’re talking about the definition of terms - and a machine learning system like an LLM clearly falls within the category of Artificial Intelligence. It’s an artificial system capable of performing a cognitive task that’s normally done by humans: generating language.
Everything. As we as humanity learn more we recognize errors or wisdom with standing the test of time.
We could go into the definition of intelligence, but it’s just not worth it.
We can just disagree and that’s fine.
I’ve had this discussion countless times, and more often than not, people argue that an LLM isn’t intelligent because it hallucinates, confidently makes incorrect statements, or fails at basic logic. But that’s not a failure on the LLM’s part - it’s a mismatch between what the system is and what the user expects it to be.
An LLM isn’t an AGI. It’s a narrowly intelligent system, just like a chess engine. It can perform a task that typically requires human intelligence, but it can only do that one task, and its intelligence doesn’t generalize across multiple independent domains. A chess engine plays chess. An LLM generates natural-sounding language. Both are AI systems and both are intelligent - just not generally intelligent.
Sorry, no. It’s not intelligent at all. It just responds with statistical accuracy. There’s also no objective discussion about it because that’s how neural networks work.
I was hesitant to answer because we’re clearly both convinced. So out of respect let’s just close by saying we have different opinions.
Yeah… But in order to make bubble hash you need a shitload of weed trimmings. It’s not like your just gonna watch a YouTube video, then a few hours later have a bunch of drugs you created… Unless you already had the drugs in the first place.
Also Google search results and YouTube videos arent personalized for every user, and they don’t try to pretend that they are a person having a conversation with you
Those are examples, you obviously would need to attain alcohol or drugs if you ask ChatGPT too. That isn’t the point. The point is, if someone wants to find that information, it’s been available for decades. Youtube and and Google results are personalized, look it up.
Couple more studies like this and you will be able to substitute all LLMs with generic “I would love to help you but my answer might be harmful so I will not tell you how to X. Would you like to ask me about something else?”
