I asked it if AI is a bubble, yes or no and shockingly (or not shockingly?) only two models said yes and most said no.

This is after the fact that even OpenAI admits that its a bubble and just like, we all know its a bubble and I found this fascinating

The gist below has a screenshot of it

https://gist.github.com/SerJaimeLannister/4da2729a0d2c9848e6...

▲

fluoridation 21 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I'm not sure this actually means anything, though. Like, what information is being taken into account to reach their conclusions? How are they reaching their conclusions? Is someone messing with the input to make the models lean in a certain direction? Just knowing which ones said yes and which ones said no doesn't provide a whole lot of information.

▲

irishcoffee 17 hours ago | parent [-]

> Like, what information is being taken into account to reach their conclusions? How are they reaching their conclusions? Is someone messing with the input to make the models lean in a certain direction?

I say this exact same thing every time I think about using an LLM.

	▲	fluoridation 17 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It's pretty funny that the fact we've managed to get a computer to trick us into thinking it thinks without even understanding why it works is causing people to lose their minds.

▲

jesenator 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yeah I wouldn't read too much into their response on the AI bubble question. They don't have access to any search tools or recent events so all they know is up until their knowledge cutoff (you can find this date online, if you're interested). Glad you found it fascinating regardless!