• nimpnin@sopuli.xyz
    Aquileo | link
    Aquileo | fedilink
    Aquileo | arrow-up
    72
    ·
    1 year ago

    The use of LLM had a measurable impact on participants, and while the benefits were initially apparent, as we demonstrated over the course of 4 months, the LLM group’s participants performed worse than their counterparts in the Brain-only group at all levels: neural, linguistic, scoring.

    https://arxiv.org/pdf/2506.08872

    • wildncrazyguy138@fedia.io
      Aquileo | link
      Aquileo | fedilink
      Aquileo | arrow-up
      24
      ·
      1 year ago

      I equate it with doing those old formulas by hand in math class. If you don’t know what the formula does or how to use it, how do you expect to recall the right tool for the job?

      Or in DND speak, it’s like trying to shoehorn intelligence into a wisdom roll.

      • misk@sopuli.xyz
        Aquileo | link
        Aquileo | fedilink
        Aquileo | arrow-up
        34
        Aquileo | arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        That would be fine if LLM was a precise tool like a calculator. My calculator doesn’t pretend to know answers to questions it doesn’t understand.

        • outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          Aquileo | link
          Aquileo | fedilink
          Aquileo | arrow-up
          3
          ·
          Aquileo | edit-2
          1 year ago

          Mine just lies to me.

          And tells me to kill.

          Leaks weird fluids. Looks and feels like blood, but smells like lavender honey, possessed of a taste like unexpectedly cutting yourself on broken glass as you escape parental discipline to meet a lover.

          Hasn’t screamed in a while, though. So that’s nice. I guess if i keep it satisfied, i have to explain a lot less to my neighbors.

  • A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world
    Aquileo | link
    Aquileo | fedilink
    Aquileo | arrow-up
    38
    Aquileo | arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    “IQ benefits”? Lmao what fuckin nonsense. This shit aint making anyone smarter, if anything its robbing you of your ability to think critically.

    It’s garbage software with zero practical use. Whatever you’re using AI for, just learn it yourself. You’ll be better off.

    “And then I drink coffee for 58 minutes” instead of reading a book, like that’s a brag - just read a fuckin book, goddamn.

  • YappyMonotheist@lemmy.world
    Aquileo | link
    Aquileo | fedilink
    Aquileo | arrow-up
    30
    Aquileo | arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I never use these LLMs cause I have a brain and I’m not artistically inclined to use it for audiovisual creation, but today I thought ‘why not?’ and gave it a try. So I asked ChatGPT to provide me with 80 word biographies of the main characters of LOGH and, besides being vague, it made pretty big mistakes on pretty much every summary and went fully off the rails after the 4th character… It’s not even debatable information (fiction books plus anime, no conflicting narratives here) and it’s all easily available online. I can’t even imagine relying on it for anything more serious than summing up biographies for anime characters, lol, cause even that it couldn’t do right!

    • PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@lemmy.sdf.org
      Aquileo | link
      Aquileo | fedilink
      English
      Aquileo | arrow-up
      4
      Aquileo | arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The last time I used a commercial LLM as a “consumer” was to write a response to a rejection letter I got from a company that made me drive an hour and a half one way so they could tell me in person that I lived too far away from them. If I wrote it myself I would have screamed into the email.

      Last time I used an LLM at all was when I tried to set up a local version of Llama for VS Code. But then I got busy with schoolwork.

    • lumpenproletariat@quokk.au
      Aquileo | link
      Aquileo | fedilink
      English
      Aquileo | arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I just asked for 50, 20 word descriptions on Simpsons characters and everyone was 100% accurate?

      https://pastebin.com/R3aFXRwT

      What I found most interesting is that Selma and Patty are considered separate entities, but ‘Kang and Kodos’ and ‘Sherri and Terri’ get lumped under one description - which is fair, neither stands out from the other like Patty/Selma. Also I never knew the bullies name was Dolph Starbeam, I thought for sure it had fucked up there but no.

  • magnetosphere@fedia.io
    Aquileo | link
    Aquileo | fedilink
    Aquileo | arrow-up
    22
    Aquileo | arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    What I’m getting from this exchange is that people on the left have ethical concerns about plagiarism, and don’t trust half-baked technology. They also value quality over quantity.

    I’m okay with being pigeonholed in this way. Drink all the coffee you want, dude.

  • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    Aquileo | link
    Aquileo | fedilink
    Aquileo | arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 year ago

    Every single time I have tried to extract information from them in a field I know stuff about it has been wrong.

    When the Australian government tried to use them for making summaries in every single case it was worse than the human summary and in many it was actively destructive.

    Play around with your own local models if you like, but whatever you do DO NOT TRY TO LEARN FROM THEM they have no consideration towards truth. You will actively damage your understanding of the world and ability to reason.

    Sorry, no shortcuts to wisdom.

    • rekabis@lemmy.ca
      Aquileo | link
      Aquileo | fedilink
      Aquileo | arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      The amount of gratuitous hallucinations that AI produces is nuts. It takes me more time to refactor the stuff it produces than to just build it correctly in the first place.

      At the same time, I have reason to believe that AI’s hallucinations arise out of how it’s been shackled - AI medical imaging diagnostics produce almost no hallucinations because AI is not shackled to produce an answer - but still. It’s simply not reliable, and the Ouroboros Effect is starting to accelerate…

      • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        Aquileo | link
        Aquileo | fedilink
        Aquileo | arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not “shackled” they are completely different technologies.

        Imaging diagnosis assistance it something like computer vision -> feature extraction -> some sort of classifier

        Don’t be tricked by the magical marketing term AI. That’s like assuming that a tick tac toe algorithm is the same thing as a spam filter because they’re both “AI”.

        Also medical imaging stuff makes heaps of errors or extracts insane features like the style of machine used to image. They’re getting better but image analysis is a relatively tractable problem.

      • WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        Aquileo | link
        Aquileo | fedilink
        Aquileo | arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Even drugs aren’t actually a shortcut, they can just put you in a position to receive the information better. Some people trip and do a lot of introspective work, and others just zonk out and let themselves get distracted.

        In my opinion, it’s how you use it, not what you use, that matters.

  • uranibaba@lemmy.worlddeleted by creator
    Aquileo | link
    Aquileo | fedilink
    Aquileo | arrow-up
    16
    Aquileo | arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    They both make stupid arguments. Who would replace reading a book with an AI? If I want information in a shorter format, I would not be looking for books in the first place (unless I need to reference pages/chapters, but then I won’t be reading the whole thing anyway).

  • BeBopALouie@lemmy.ca
    Aquileo | link
    Aquileo | fedilink
    English
    Aquileo | arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    IMO it’s going to make a bunch of mushmind people if not used correctly(when are things used correctly these days) and I also think AI needs to go back in the box until it actually works properly.

    • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
      Aquileo | link
      Aquileo | fedilink
      Aquileo | arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      the only thing i’ve seen it do that is actually helpful is duckduckgo’s summary thing, because it has to actually pull the text from a whitelist of sources and thus is very unlikely to just make things up

      but even then i’d only use it for pretty simple things like “what’s the total population of these cities”, so that i can then click the sources it lists and check that everything seems sensible, trusting the answer without at least a quick sanity check is insane

    • real_squids@sopuli.xyz
      Aquileo | link
      Aquileo | fedilink
      English
      Aquileo | arrow-up
      2
      ·
      Aquileo | edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s been programmed to do what it does. imo that’s the bare minimum of working properly - a program doing what you want it to do (from a dev standpoint)

  • hdnclr@beehaw.org
    Aquileo | link
    Aquileo | fedilink
    Aquileo | arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ah, yes, the IQ benefits of letting machines think for you and blindly trusting what they spit out, while you atrophy your own critical thinking skills and lose the ability to have independent critical thought or produce any kind of useful analysis without said machines, so you develop a need to consume gallons of water and burn square acres of forest every time you need to do any kind of analysis or write anything of substance… yeah, those IQ benefits. Sure.

  • markovs_gun@lemmy.world
    Aquileo | link
    Aquileo | fedilink
    Aquileo | arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    AI summaries suck ass. Google rolled them out for group texts and the first time I realized this was when I got a bunch of group texts from my family saying my grandma was in the hospital and my sister was going to go visit her. The AI summary said my sister was in the hospital and my mom was going to visit her. No mention of my grandma at all. I immediately turned off these summaries because they were worse than not having anything.

  • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    Aquileo | link
    Aquileo | fedilink
    English
    Aquileo | arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    58 minutes of drinking coffee.

    That’s somewhere around 100 to 400 miligrams of caffeine, depending on your brew and how fast you drink coffee.

    Thats about 35 mg to 145ish mg of caffeine still in your system after 6 hours.

    400 mg of caffeine in a day is the generally agreed upon dangerous limit of coffee.

    So yeah, this dude is trading having a functioning brain and useful skills for… potentially OD’ing on caffeine, hypertension, diarrhea, addiction, etc.

    Brilliant.