Comment by jagermo
14 days ago
The only sane way is to treat LLMs like a computer in Star Trek. Give it precise orders and clarify along the way, and treat it with respect but also know its a machine with limits. Its not Data, its the ships voice
14 days ago
The only sane way is to treat LLMs like a computer in Star Trek. Give it precise orders and clarify along the way, and treat it with respect but also know its a machine with limits. Its not Data, its the ships voice
There is no need for respect, do you respect your phone? Do you respect the ls utility? Treat it as as search engine, and I wish it used the tone for the replies that makes it clear that it is just a tool and not a conversation partner, and not use misleading phrases like "I am excited/I am happy to hear" etc. How can a bunch of numbers be happy.
Maybe we need to make a blacklist of misleading expressions for AI developers.
The tone you take with it can demonstrably affect the results you get, which isn't true of the other tools you listed.
This is a bug that needs to be fixed.
2 replies →
Do what you want, i am not risking offending the machine spirit.
I'd argue the ship's computer is not an LLM, but a voice assistant.
I don't know, it has been shown multiple times that it can understand voice requests, find and organize relevant files. For example in The measure of a Man (TNG).
Wait - why is it not Data? Where is the line?
That topic (ship's computer vs. Data) is actually discussed at length in-universe during The Measure of a Man. [0] The court posits that the three requirements for sentient life are intelligence, self-awareness, and consciousness. Data is intelligent and self-aware, but there is no good measure for consciousness.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Measure_of_a_Man_(Star_Tre...
Using science fiction as a basis for philosophy isn't wise, especially TNG which has a very obvious flavor of "optimistic human exceptionalism" (contrast with DS9, where I think Eddington even makes this point).
Doesn't ChatGPT fulfill these criteria too?
12 replies →