TechTakes

1493 readers

114 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

dgerard@awful.systems

Don’t use AI to summarize documents — it’s worse than humans in every way (pivot-to-ai.com)

submitted 3 months ago by dgerard@awful.systems to c/techtakes@awful.systems

53 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] lvxferre@mander.xyz 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

But the claims of the text are often why you read it in the first place!

By "not caring about the former" [claims], I mean in the LLM output, because you know that the LLM will fuck them up. But it'll still somewhat accurately represent the topic of the text, and you can use this to your advantage.

You might as well just skim the titles and guess.

Nirvana fallacy.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago

Unless it doesn't accurately represent the topic, which happens, and then a researcher chooses not to read the text based on the chatbot's summary.

Nirvana fallacy.

All these chatbots do is guess. I'm just saying a researcher might as well cut out the hallucinating middleman.

[–] self@awful.systems 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

not reading the fucking sidebar and thinking this is high school debate club fallacy

[–] lvxferre@mander.xyz 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

not reading the fucking sidebar

Yeah, I get that this is a place to vent. And I get why to vent about this. LLMs and other A"I" systems (with quotation marks because this shite is not intelligent!) are being shoved down every bloody where, regardless of actual usefulness, safety, or user desire. Telling you to put glue on your pizza, to eat poisonous mushrooms, that "cherish" has five letters, that Latin had no [w], that the Chinese are inferior to Westerners.

While a crowd of irrationals tell you "it is intelligent, you can't prove otherwise! CHRUST IT YOU DIRTY SCEPTIC/INFIDEL/LUDDITE REEEE! LALALA I'M PRETENDING TO NOT SEE THE HALLUCINATION LALALA".

I also get the privacy nightmare that this shit is. And the whole deal behind "we're using your content as training data, and then selling the result back to you". Or that it's eating electricity like there's no tomorrow, in a planet where global warming is a present issue.

I get it. I get it all. That's why I'm here. And if you (or anyone else) think that I'm here for any other reason, by all means, check my profile - you'll find plenty pieces of criticism against those stupid corporate AI takes from vulture capital. (And plenty instances of me calling HN "Redditors LARPing as Hax0rz". )

However. Pretending that there's no use case ever for LLMs is the wrong way to go.

and thinking this is high school debate club fallacy

If calling it "nirvana fallacy" rubs you the wrong way, here's an alternative: "this argument is fucking stupid, in a very specific way: it pretends that either something is perfect or it's useless, with no middle ground."

The other user however does not deserve the unnecessary abrasiveness so I'll keep simply calling it "nirvana fallacy".

[–] self@awful.systems 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

holy shit, imagine getting a second chance to not be a fucking debatelord and doubling down this hard

off you fuck

[–] blakestacey@awful.systems 1 points 3 months ago

People just out here acting like a fundamentally, inextricably unreliable and unethical technology has a "use case"

smdh