| ▲ | tadfisher 3 hours ago | |||||||
That is precisely the problem. When writing technical documentation, such as the landing page for an FPGA inference engine, a model should not need to be prompted to use proper voice and to avoid marketing language. There should be enough context in the text of the prompt itself. | ||||||||
| ▲ | bonoboTP 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
I don't think any of this indicates a fundamental property of the tech itself. AI companies post-train their models to sound like what people like to read better. There's a reason that engagement farmers have converged on the tone that these LLMs imitate, namely its something that people prefer. Maybe not you, but it's the same thing that gives us YouTube face on thumbnails etc. It takes some prompting to nudge the model out of that default voice because post training reinforced it. They will likely shift it once these AI-isms are known and recognized widely. I'd assume the nextgem models under training now will get negative feedback from the human evaluators for talking too AI-like and then there will be new AI smells to calibrate to. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
| [deleted] | ||||||||