<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>unshavedyak</author><text>&amp;gt; LLMs are excellent plausible bullshit generators, which has many uses, but being factually correct is not their strength. The issue is that even if the factual mistakes are rare, they&amp;#x27;re really hard to spot. I&amp;#x27;m looking for a good, terse, catchy metaphor I could use to explain that to some of my family members and friends.&lt;p&gt;To me the bigger question is how far can we take them? Ie i get that they just pick likely next words. They&amp;#x27;re autocomplete on steroids. Yet that simple primitive is shockingly good. Way, way way beyond that i would have predicted is possible for an &amp;quot;autocomplete&amp;quot;.&lt;p&gt;So where is the limit of this autocomplete? Would it be possible to eliminate ~90% of the current errors? Fake math, but would that put us at a more correct version than students typically graduate with? If so yea, it can be wrong at times - but assuming as don&amp;#x27;t abandon standardized testing&amp;#x2F;etc, it could still be an amazing tool for interactively learning something.&lt;p&gt;My hope is that even if it never goes beyond being an autocomplete; if we can improve the training dataset, help it not conflict with itself, etc - that maybe the autocomplete will be insanely useful.</text><parent_chain><item><author>rpastuszak</author><text>&amp;gt; They all have a role, and we have to incorporate them in sensible ways. I&amp;#x27;m sure that these AI tools will have some use, but these language models don&amp;#x27;t know anything.&lt;p&gt;I find it worrying that I see so many techies not understanding this. Especially, because many bigger players in the area benefit from this lack of knowledge. This means that people who don&amp;#x27;t have time to procrastinate on the orange website are even less likely to understand the implications.&lt;p&gt;LLMs are excellent plausible bullshit generators, which has many uses, but being factually correct is not their strength. The issue is that even if the factual mistakes are rare, they&amp;#x27;re really hard to spot. I&amp;#x27;m looking for a good, terse, catchy metaphor I could use to explain that to some of my family members and friends.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; We can spend billions on deploying AI all over Africa, or we pay for [...]&lt;p&gt;Looking back at the conversations I had with founders even I pre ChatGPT bonanza, I&amp;#x27;m 100% sure someone&amp;#x27;s already pitching that idea to someone. I wouldn&amp;#x27;t be surprised if that conversation started in a marketing department of an ad tech business.</text></item><item><author>SilverBirch</author><text>You know how that journalist had a long conversation with Bing and it slowly turned into a psycho-ex girlfriend? This is going to be hilarious, giving kids prolonged access to these AI tools. You get to the parent teacher evening at the end of a term at school: &amp;quot;Err... little timmy and his virtual assistant appear to have entirely neglected maths in favour of adopting Zoroastrianism&amp;quot;.&lt;p&gt;On a more serious note, we have the internet and wikipedia now, we have ipads in classrooms. They all have a role, and we have to incorporate them in sensible ways. I&amp;#x27;m sure that these AI tools will have some use, but these language models don&amp;#x27;t &lt;i&gt;know&lt;/i&gt; anything. The examples of them making up information, or being persuaded by people are all over the place. I think it&amp;#x27;s great to use AI in teaching, but how about we learn from history, the technology we bring in to the classroom has to be well understood and directed in order to be effective. And just as importantly we need to understand that in many cases a focus on technological solutions distract from societal solutions. We can spend billions on deploying AI all over Africa, or we pay for some teachers and ship them some second hand textbooks, which one should we do, and how will that decision be made? Because I fear the decision will be made by some SBF-alike, more interested in their own journey than effective solutions.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>One AI Tutor Per Child: Personalized learning is finally here</title><url>https://saigaddam.medium.com/one-ai-tutor-per-child-personalized-learning-is-finally-here-e3727d84a2d7</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>maxdoop</author><text>I find it equally worrying how so many techies continue to dismiss LLMs as “bullshit generators “.&lt;p&gt;I struggle to see how even the current GPT-4 is any worse than your average human.&lt;p&gt;How this is dismissed because it’s not 100% perfect (might at add, “yet”) is beyond me.</text><parent_chain><item><author>rpastuszak</author><text>&amp;gt; They all have a role, and we have to incorporate them in sensible ways. I&amp;#x27;m sure that these AI tools will have some use, but these language models don&amp;#x27;t know anything.&lt;p&gt;I find it worrying that I see so many techies not understanding this. Especially, because many bigger players in the area benefit from this lack of knowledge. This means that people who don&amp;#x27;t have time to procrastinate on the orange website are even less likely to understand the implications.&lt;p&gt;LLMs are excellent plausible bullshit generators, which has many uses, but being factually correct is not their strength. The issue is that even if the factual mistakes are rare, they&amp;#x27;re really hard to spot. I&amp;#x27;m looking for a good, terse, catchy metaphor I could use to explain that to some of my family members and friends.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; We can spend billions on deploying AI all over Africa, or we pay for [...]&lt;p&gt;Looking back at the conversations I had with founders even I pre ChatGPT bonanza, I&amp;#x27;m 100% sure someone&amp;#x27;s already pitching that idea to someone. I wouldn&amp;#x27;t be surprised if that conversation started in a marketing department of an ad tech business.</text></item><item><author>SilverBirch</author><text>You know how that journalist had a long conversation with Bing and it slowly turned into a psycho-ex girlfriend? This is going to be hilarious, giving kids prolonged access to these AI tools. You get to the parent teacher evening at the end of a term at school: &amp;quot;Err... little timmy and his virtual assistant appear to have entirely neglected maths in favour of adopting Zoroastrianism&amp;quot;.&lt;p&gt;On a more serious note, we have the internet and wikipedia now, we have ipads in classrooms. They all have a role, and we have to incorporate them in sensible ways. I&amp;#x27;m sure that these AI tools will have some use, but these language models don&amp;#x27;t &lt;i&gt;know&lt;/i&gt; anything. The examples of them making up information, or being persuaded by people are all over the place. I think it&amp;#x27;s great to use AI in teaching, but how about we learn from history, the technology we bring in to the classroom has to be well understood and directed in order to be effective. And just as importantly we need to understand that in many cases a focus on technological solutions distract from societal solutions. We can spend billions on deploying AI all over Africa, or we pay for some teachers and ship them some second hand textbooks, which one should we do, and how will that decision be made? Because I fear the decision will be made by some SBF-alike, more interested in their own journey than effective solutions.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>One AI Tutor Per Child: Personalized learning is finally here</title><url>https://saigaddam.medium.com/one-ai-tutor-per-child-personalized-learning-is-finally-here-e3727d84a2d7</url></story>