• arcterus@piefed.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Tbh them being nondeterministic is a big part of why they’re so unreliable. Like, maybe it’ll work fine for 9/10 people, but then there will be that one person whose home directory gets wiped for whatever reason. Or maybe it’ll do math right for those nine people, but then for that one person it’ll say 1 + 1 = 11.

    You’re basically gambling if you don’t verify the answers.

    • FishFace@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Not really… Determinism would only help if you could copy someone else’s prompt and history 100%, which you generally would not be able to.

      Because maybe it always gets 1+1 correct, but fails 1+2.

      • arcterus@piefed.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’m referring to nondeterminism for the same prompt, since unless you start a session from scratch, it’s unlikely you’ll have the same history. If you give it a prompt, then depending on what you’ve told it previously, it may blow up in your face.

        • FishFace@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Determinism for the same prompt means you can’t give it context through a conversation, which vastly shrinks its utility.

          That said, even that form of determinism can be unreliable: the example of arithmetic still works; you could have it completely deterministic, but if it only performs correctly on 80% of arithmetic problems, it’s still unreliable.