It's not circular. LLMs cannot be fluent because fluency comes from an understanding of the language. An LLM is incapable of understanding so it is incapable of being fluent. It may be able to mimic it but that is a different thing. (In my opinion)
It's not circular. LLMs cannot be fluent because fluency comes from an understanding of the language. An LLM is incapable of understanding so it is incapable of being fluent. It may be able to mimic it but that is a different thing. (In my opinion)
Shrinkflation still happens, you just get to watch two numbers go up now.
How is it wrong? First it makes some assumptions about the question and answers the typical version of the riddle. Then it answers the trivial version where there are no additional items. Seems like a complete and reasonable response to me.
I agree, it's a massive issue. It's a very complex topic that most people have no way of understanding. It is superb at generating text, and that makes it look smarter than it actually is, which is really dangerous. I think the creators of these models have a responsibility to communicate what these models can and can't do, but unfortunately that is not profitable.
There is not enough activity to sustain niche communities.
It's easier to nitpick than it is to interact with the actual argument.
I agree with you. The headline is misleading, and I think it devalues the article.
Meta holds the record for the largest gdpr fine at 1,2 billion euro.
In this case it is more a feature being called a bug
If we ignore the other poster, do you think the logic in my previous comment is circular?
That was what I was trying to say, I can see that the wording is ambiguous.
How do you plan on that happening?
The lack of nuance in any discussion on Lemmy is making me less and less interested in comment sections.
If a solution is correct then a solution is correct. If a correct solution was generated randomly that doesn't make it less correct. It just means that you may not always get correct solutions from the generating process, which is why they are checked after.
They're not saying it is the only factor, only that it is a relevant factor. Which it obviously is.
Flying commercial would be disregarding everyone's safety.
It's not a bug, it's a natural consequence of the methodology. A language model won't always be correct when it doesn't know what it is saying.