← Back to context

Comment by streetfighter64

1 month ago

It's common sense to know that you need to have your car with you to wash it. Asking the question is a challenge in the obvious yes. If you asked an AI "what's 2+2" and it said 3, would you argue that the question was a trick question?

No. I would expect it to say 4 given that has an objective answer. For the other, without any context whatsoever, I would prefer the answer of clarifying. I would be okay if the way it asked for clarification came with:

“What do you mean walk or drive? I don’t understand the options given you would need your car at the car wash. Is there something else I should know?”

  • "What do you mean two plus two? I don't understand the question given that it's basic math. Is there something else I should know?"

    • You're not making a fair comparison.

      "What's 2 + 2" is a completely abstract question for mathematics that human beings are thoroughly trained mostly to associate with tests of mastery and intelligence.

      The car wash question is not such a question. It is framed as a question regarding a goal oriented, practical behavior, and in this situation it would be bizarre for a person to ask you this (since a rational person having all the information in the prompt, knowing what cars are, which they own, and knowing what a car wash is, wouldn't ask anybody anything, they'd just drive their car to the car wash).

      And as someone else noted there are in fact situations in which it actually can be reasonable to ask for more context on what you mean by "2 + 2". You're just pointing out that human beings use a variety of social mores when interpreting messages, which is precisely why the car wash question silly/a trick were a human being to ask you and not preceded the question with a statement like "we're going to take an examine to test your logical reasoning".

      As with LLMs, interpretation is all about context. The people that find this question weird (reasonably) interpret it in a practical context, not in a "this is a logic puzzle context" because human beings wags cats far more often than they subject themselves to logic puzzles.

      1 reply →

    • I fail to see how these things are one and the same. I get the point you are making, I just don't agree with it.

      2+2 is a complete expression, the other is grammatically correct but logically flawed. Where is the logical fallacy in 2+2?

      2 replies →