| ▲ | Lerc 4 hours ago |
| Has it been shown or admitted that the quotes were hallucinations, or is it the presumption that all made up content is a hallucination now? |
|
| ▲ | Pay08 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| You could read the original blog post... |
| |
| ▲ | Lerc 22 minutes ago | parent [-] | | How could that prove hallucinations? It could only possibly prove that they are not. If the quotes are in the original post then they are not hallucinations. If they are not in the post they could be caused by something is not a LLM. Misquotes and fabricated quotes have existed long before AI, And indeed, long before computers. | | |
| ▲ | DonHopkins 16 minutes ago | parent [-] | | How could reading the original blog post prove hallucinations??! Now you've moved the goalposts to defending your failure to read the original blog post, by denying it's possible to know anything at all for sure, so why bother reading. So you STILL have not read the original blog post. Please stop bickering until AFTER you have at least done that bare minimum of trivial due diligence. I'm sorry if it's TL;DR for you to handle, but if that's the case, then TL;DC : Too Long; Don't Comment. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | DonHopkins 19 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] |
| You're as bad as the lazy incompetent journalists. Just read the post instead of asking questions and pretending to be skeptical instead of too lazy to read the article this discussion is about. Then you would be fully aware that the person who the quotes are attributed to has stated very clearly and emphatically that he did not say those things. Are you implying he is an untrustworthy liar about his own words, when you claim it's impossible to prove they're not hallucinations? |
