undefined | Better HN

0 pointsJoel_Mckay22h ago0 comments

A web search doesn't use isomorphic plagiarism of naive users work to sell to other users.

LLM are actually good at context search, but are mostly not being used as intended. The LLM hype bubble has to end sooner or later. =3

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

mewpmewp222h ago· 2 in thread

How does that answer the question or relate to variable reward and addiction mechanisms? This just seems another unrelated negative sentiment argument towards LLMs?

Joel_MckayOP22h ago

Not really, people are simply fooled by pernicious sycophantic idealism, and their own cognitive biases.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_Turk

LLM are great for context search, but were never real "AI" in any sense except in media/PR sensationalism. Scientific hubris and unethical use of LLM is interesting as exposes the primitive impulsive nature of many. Best of luck =3

dqv18h ago

This is my read on how people react to LLM responses, especially about personal/social issues too - that many are fooled by the LLM. On occasion, someone has shown me LLM output, believing it to be a profound and illuminating response to their prompt.

Even being able to see the original prompt, the response just seemed kind of empty (blocking out the advertisingesque magnificent language leaves little substance behind), but somehow they were convinced that it was a coherent answer to their prompt and even peeved with me for not sharing their astonishment at how well it addressed their concerns.

It's a kind of symbiosis between the LLM and the prompter, where the prompter's own cognitive biases fill in what the LLM can not. Since I don't share their same biases, the response is nearly meaningless.

Very uncomfortable experience having to pretend to agree with how profound it is to not make their prompter upset.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse