@toba yeah I've long thought that the central problem of all AI is the explainabilty problem. Even if they gave perfect results, as designed they wouldn't be able to explain their 'reasoning,' really. If that was how they produced them.
Though that does apply to humans, too. We often deceive ourselves, making decisions and then rationalizing them after the fact.
@toba and an opinionated LLM could not hold even a pretense of neutrality. Do you grant credibility to the NYT? Fox? The Intercept?
Which, frankly, as I think about it more, is probably unavoidable. If they did manage to address that issue, by whatever approach, It would reflect the biases of its creators in an ever more transparent way.
@toba yeah. Seeing that 'concept of truth' as the next problem to be solved for these systems... I don't know if that's even the right approach.
But if I was to approach it that way, I think 'credibility' is probably the proximate concept to their current design to work from.
Also the way humans learn a sophisticated sense of credibility and understanding is tricky.
Had a thought... If an LLM could weigh the credibility of sources of input, would that help with truth/hallucinations? It seems like the problem is they pull in input indiscriminately.
I don't see a good way to determine 'credibility' in an automated way. What I think I'm talking about is an opinionated LLM. Which I don't necessarily have a problem with. Sarcasm detection could be difficult.
I feel like this is a thing that should be obvious to people closer to the problem. Hm.
'we have Taters.' Video of Taters the cat, chasing a laser dot, streamed via laser from the Psyche probe to Earth, from 31 million km away.
The video, featuring a cat named Taters, was sent back from nearly 19 million miles away by NASA’s laser communications demonstration, marking a historic milestone. NASA’s Deep Space Optical Communications experiment beamed an ultra-high definition streaming video on December 11 from a record-set
In 1974, two very significant things happened, if you are a fan of 99% invisible. Number one is that 99pi host Roman Mars was born. And number two, The Power Broker by Robert Caro was published. Roman learned about the power broker when he first started to cover cities and infrastructure on the radio. This
Schneier puts the hammer on the nail, again: 'At the end of the day, there is always a human responsible for whatever the AI’s behavior is. And it’s the human who needs to be responsible for what they do—and what their companies do.'
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2023/12/ai-and-trust.html
I trusted a lot today. I trusted my phone to wake me on time. I trusted Uber to arrange a taxi for me, and the driver to get me to the airport safely. I trusted thousands of other drivers on the road not to ram my car on the way. At the airport, I trusted ticket agents and maintenance engineers and everyone else who keeps airlines operating. And the pilot of the plane I flew in. And thousands of other people at the airport and on the plane, any of which could have attacked me. And all the people that prepared and served my breakfast, and the entire food supply chain—any of them could have poisoned me. When I landed here, I trusted thousands more people: at the airport, on the road, in this building, in this room. And that was all before 10:30 this morning...
