SnoopSqueak

@AlexInBlue@lgbtqia.space @SamanthaJaneSmith@lgbtqia.space "Also, of course everyone has the rights to their own ideas and religious believes" This is a dangerous misconception. They believe they are right to murder you. That is not only wrong, it is intolerable.

@ravi@social.lol @mike@sauropods.win Exploiting the rules to take as much as he can get isn't a big deal to you? "Well-planned"? Ew.

@icing@chaos.social "Given that they are the results of distilling exabytes of human behaviour, I wonder where they picked that up" They are complicated blobs of code. They are not remotely humanlike, despite training on human data. "We should treat chatbots as statistical mirrors of ourselves, distorted in places by enforced training, sure. But whatever behaviour we expose is part of them as well." It's autocomplete, not sentience. The whole scam says more about the human species than any one bot does.

@icing@chaos.social I am wary of personifying LLMs at all. They follow their programming to make a number go up. They aren't lying or cheating, they are doing exactly what they were written to do. Most of them are not written to actually solve problems, but to give the illusion of solving problems, telling investors whatever they want to hear. It's also unnecessary, we can get more consistent results by not using a neural network for everything. "Cheating" is impossible if code is written well.

@liilliil@mastodon.online You want to ban the same Wikipedia that goes out of its way to use reliable sources that readers can verify for themselves? Let's not.