← Back to context

Comment by NortySpock

4 hours ago

One mental model I have with LLMs is that they have been the subject of extreme evolutionary selection forces that are entirely the result of human preferences.

Any LLM not sufficiently likable and helpful in the first two minutes was deleted or not further iterated on, or had so much retraining (sorry, "backpropagation") it's not the same as it started out.

So it's going to say whatever it "thinks" you want it to say, because that's how it was "raised".

Fully agree. I wonder in the long term how this will show up. Will every business/CEO do more of what he/they anyway want to do, but now supported by AI/LLMs?

The possibilities in "dangerous" fields are a bit more frightening. A general is much more likely to ask ChatGPT "Do you think this war is a good idea/should I drop a bomb", rather than an actually helpful tool - where you might ask "What are 5 hidden points on favor of/against bombing that one likely has missed".

The more you use AI as a strict tool that can be wrong, the safer. Unfortunately I'm not sure if that helps if the guy bombing your city (or even your president) is using AI poorly, and their decisions affect you.

  • > Will every business/CEO do more of what he/they anyway want to do, but now supported by AI/LLMs?

    Arguably, it already worked that way. The best way to climb the ranks of a 'dictatorial' organization (a repressive government or an average large business) is to always say yes. Adopt what the people from up above want you to use, say and think. Don't question anything. Find silver linings in their most deranged ideas to show your loyalty. The rich and powerful that occupy the top ranks of these structures often hate being challenged, even if it's irrational for their well-being. Whenever you see a country or a company making a massive mistake, you can often trace it to a consequence of this. Humans hate being challenged and the rich can insulate themselves even further from the real world.

    What's worrying me is the opposite - that this power is more available now. Instead of requiring a team of people and an asset cushion that lets you act irrationally, now you just need to have a phone in your pocket. People get addicted to LLMs because they can provide endless, varied validation for just about anything. Even if someone is aware of their own biases, it's not a given that they'll always counteract the validation.