New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
Sign up
46
Every single time (media.scored.co)
posted 1 year ago by RealWildRanter on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +46Score on mirror )
You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
RealWildRanter on scored.co
1 year ago 4 points (+0 / -0 / +4Score on mirror ) 1 child
Pretty much. I always talk to AI about things I know expecting dishonesty.

Before that screenshot I was asking about the relation between genetic entropy and dysgenetics resulting in a satisfactory answer. Then I asked what year the phenomenon was first observed, then it talked about the decline after covid and it jumped to the 1930's when cognitive tests were first applied en masse. The next paragraph came the gaslighting calling everything pseudoscience. Then I told it to stop lecturing me as once the theory of relativity was presented the scientific community took it with skepticism then it was proved to be true, and the same will happen with genetic entropy as it can be easily observed in society. The bot profusely justified by saying as a machine language model it can make mistakes, and it promised to do better next time. Then I asked it to list the references for that answer, and the bot told me as a machine learning model it couldn't do it despite the fact it had done to come uo with that response. Then I asked the name of the Japanese paper where they discovered after covid the IQs dropped from 5 to 10 points. Quickly it replied there was no such paper, I asked to search it again. Same thing happened with that I'm a machine learning model excuse. Then I told it to stop using that excuse as it was offensive to assume I'm forgetting that fact. Then it told me it wouldn't repeat that fact, and I told it you just did it again. After another promise I asked the question on the screenshot.

BTW, that chatbot is developed by Meta AI. No wonder it so jewish.
IGOexiled on scored.co
1 year ago 0 points (+0 / -0 ) 1 child
Yeah. So, a prompt, the thing you type and hit Enter... those can be thought of as a complicated shape. And the LLM can be thought of as a Pachinko machine. The prompt bounces down the board of pegs and eventually lands in a cup. That cup is the answer it gives you.

The illusion is that because answers are long, it seems like there couldn't be that many cups and it's doing something more complicated. Nope. Pachinko.

The shape of your question causes it to bounce one direction preferentially vs. others.

Kike Meta may block off sections of Pachinko track, or cover up some cups, or tilt the board at an angle.

But it's all just shaking the dice.
RealWildRanter on scored.co
1 year ago 0 points (+0 / -0 ) 1 child
It's all a trick to make you think it's a roll of dice when in practice computer programs are deterministic, and have extreme difficulty generating true randomness. It's the gas lighting and the profuse use of circular logic that gives that up. But normal users are too dumb to recognize these tricks. They give it some input, and after a quarter of a second an output comes up, and they become impressed or happy that can carry on being lazy because they realized the machine can do the work for them. Let's not talk about coding as AI is barely batter than a horde of pajeet monkeys typing on keyboards until the compiler stops complaining.
IGOexiled on scored.co
1 year ago 1 point (+0 / -0 / +1Score on mirror )
It's interesting to set the seed and see the differences in responses due to to the RNG functions. (Which you are correct, are not truly random)

You can really get a feel for the topography of the model. Either try same prompt with lots of seeds or many prompts with the same seed. Compare responses.




Toast message