• Beej Jorgensen@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    Current models are completely incapable of fact checking, despite any claims they may make.

    This is demonstrably false. Ask it to find the bugs in a chunk of code, for example. You can try that right now.

    You always have to back up what it says with an authoritative source, but that’s not particularly tough to do once you have a candidate answer. And if it’s code, you compile it.

    It’s arguably far easier than trying to sift through the mountains of SEO shit yourself.

    • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      Ask it to find the bugs in a chunk of code, for example. You can try that right now.

      That is not fact checking. Ask your slop machine to explain to you why that isn’t fact checking.

          • Beej Jorgensen@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            20 hours ago

            I’m not sure whom I’d trust more than yourself for what your definition of a fact is. It’s clear “this program has bugs” is not a fact by your definition. Are you talking about things like “the number of souls on the Titanic”?

            • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              20 hours ago

              Yep, you get it! And thats the kind of thing LLMs are weak at fundamentally. It’s terrifying that an educator is relying on them for that because they simply don’t work that way. They are much better suited to tasks like the example you gave.