Comment by gortok
7 days ago
No one is “requiring perfection”, but hallucination is a major issue and is in the opposite direction of the “goal” of AGI.
If “don’t hallucinate” is too much to ask then ethics flew out the window long ago.
7 days ago
No one is “requiring perfection”, but hallucination is a major issue and is in the opposite direction of the “goal” of AGI.
If “don’t hallucinate” is too much to ask then ethics flew out the window long ago.
> No one is “requiring perfection”
> If “don’t hallucinate” is too much to ask then ethics flew out the window long ago.
Those sentences aren't compatible.
> but hallucination is a major issue
Again, every official public AI interface has warnings/disclaimers for this issue. It's well known. It's not some secret. Every AI researcher is directly or indirectly working on this.
> is in the opposite direction of the “goal” of AGI
This isn't a logical statement, so it's difficult to respond to. Hallucination isn't a direction that's being headed towards, it's being actively, with intent and $$$, headed away from.
> Those sentences aren't compatible.
My web browser isn't perfect, but it does not hallucinate inexistent webpages. It sometimes crashes, it sometimes renders wrong, it has bugs and errors. It does not invent plausible-looking information.
There really is a lot middle gound between perfect and "accept anything we give you, no matter how huge the problems".
> It does not invent plausible-looking information.
This is where your analogy is falling apart; of course web browsers do not "invent plausible-looking information" because they don't invent anything in the first place! Web browsers represent a distinct set of capabilities, and as you correctly pointed out, these are often riddled with bugs and errors. If I was making a browser analogy, I would point towards fingerprinting; most browsers reveal too much information about any given user and system, either via cross-site cookies, GPU prints, and whatnot. This is an actual example where "ethics flew out the window long ago."
As the adjacent commenter pointed out: different software, different failure modes.
Different tech, different failure modes.
> it sometimes renders wrong
Is close to equivalent.