|
Top-level
 I'm generally not that big on "hey look, I made the AI say something bad!" stories. It's programmed to please, so if you really want to make it say bad stuff, you probably can. But with tons of folks now using AI chatbots as research tools, it seems not great if they're freely mixing facts with equally plausible-sounding lies backed up by bogus citations. 5 comments
@willoremus I don’t disagree but will offer a little color. First, chat bots have no notion of truth. In fact, they have no notions at all. They need to work with other systems that are designed to at least represent knowledge. Second, because they’re complex and probabilistic, making these LLM chat bots work with systems that are designed for representing knowledge is hard. And third, a wide open text box is a particularly terrible UI for a system with these limitations.  @willoremus I think "Ourobouros" is a fine name for our chatbot overlord. Much friendlier than "Skynet," still scary enough to get DARPA funding, and allegorically correct. |
Gregory's Server
And if tech firms' solution to AI's Pinocchio problem is to plug their chatbots into the internet, look stuff up, and then confidently misinterpret what they find, this isn't going to be the last time we see a misinfo ourobouros in which one AI's false claim becomes another's documented fact.