this post was submitted on 26 May 2024
454 points (95.6% liked)

Technology

59398 readers
2555 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

These are 17 of the worst, most cringeworthy Google AI overview answers:

  1. Eating Boogers Boosts the Immune System?
  2. Use Your Name and Birthday for a Memorable Password
  3. Training Data is Fair Use
  4. Wrong Motherboard
  5. Which USB is Fastest?
  6. Home Remedies for Appendicitis
  7. Can I Use Gasoline in a Recipe?
  8. Glue Your Cheese to the Pizza
  9. How Many Rocks to Eat
  10. Health Benefits of Tobacco or Chewing Tobacco
  11. Benefits of Nuclear War, Human Sacrifice and Infanticide
  12. Pros and Cons of Smacking a Child
  13. Which Religion is More Violent?
  14. How Old is Gen D?
  15. Which Presidents Graduated from UW?
  16. How Many Muslim Presidents Has the U.S. Had?
  17. How to Type 500 WPM
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 123 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Several users on X.com reported that, when they asked the search engine how many Muslim presidents the U.S. has had, it said that we had one who was Barack Obama (this is widely known to be false).

By the time I tried to replicate this query, I could not do so until I changed the word “presidents” to “heads of state.”

So they are changing responses on the query side as they go viral but aren't even including synonyms. Yikes, someone is definitely getting fired.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 5 months ago

fire the computer. go back to the pigeons

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 52 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The author had so many things to highlight that they didn't even mention "as of August 2024" being in the future, haha.

What a trainwreck. The fact it's giving anonymous Reddit comments and The Onion articles equal consideration with other sites is hilarious. If they're going to keep this, they need it to cite its sources at a bare minimum. Can't wait for this AI investor hype to die down.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 5 months ago

If they’re going to keep this, they need it to cite its sources at a bare minimum.

Got a fun one for you then. I asked Gemini (likely the same underlying model as Google's AI answers) "How many joules of energy can a battery output? Provide sources." I'll skip to the relevant part:

Here are some sources that discuss battery capacity and conversion to Joules:

  • Battery Electronics 101 explains the formula and provides an example.\
  • Answers on Engineering Stack Exchange [invalid URL removed] discuss how to estimate a AA battery's total energy in Joules.

The link to the first "source" was a made up site, https://gemini.google.com/axconnectorlubricant.com. The site axconnectorlubricant.com does exist, but it has zero to do with the topic, it's about a lubricant. No link provided for the second "source".

[–] [email protected] 49 points 5 months ago (4 children)

What it demonstrates is the actual use case for AI is not All The Things.

Science research, programming, and . . . That’s about it.

[–] [email protected] 43 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

LLM's are not AI, though. They're just fancy auto-complete. Just bigger Elizas, no closer to anything remotely resembling actual intelligence.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago

True, I’m just using it how they’re using it.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 5 months ago (4 children)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 months ago (2 children)

It should not be used to replace programmers. But it can be very useful when used by programmers who know what they're doing. ("do you see any flaws in this code?" / "what could be useful approaches to tackle X, given constraints A, B and C?"). At worst, it can be used as rubber duck debugging that sometimes gives useful advice or when no coworker is available.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

The article I posted references a study where chatgpt was wrong 52% of the time and verbose 77% of the time.

And that it was believed to be true more than it actually was. And the study was explicitly on programming questions.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah, I saw. But when I'm stuck on a programming issue, I have a couple of options:

  • ask an LLM that I can explain the issue to, correct my prompt a couple of times when it's getting things wrong, and then press retry a couple of times to get something useful.
  • ask online and wait. Hoping that some day, somebody will come along that has the knowledge and the time to answer.

Sure, LLMs may not be perfect, but not having them as an option is worse, and way slower.

In my experience - even when the code it generates is wrong, it will still send you in the right direction concerning the approach. And if it keeps spewing out nonsense, that's usually an indication that what you want is not possible.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I am completely convinced that people who say LLMs should not be used for coding.....

Either do not do much coding for work, or they have not used an LLM when tackling a problem in an unfamiliar language or tech stack.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago

I haven't had need to do it.

I can ask people I work with who do know, or I can find the same thing ChatGPT provides in either la huage or project documentation, usually presented in a better format.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

do you see any flaws in this code?

Let’s say LLM says the code is error free; how do you know the LLM is being truthful? What happens when someone assumes it’s right and puts buggy code into production? Seems like a possible false sense of security to me.

The creative steps are where it’s good, but I wouldn’t trust it to confirm code was free of errors.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

I'm not entirely sure why you think it shouldn't?

Just because it sucks at one-shotting programming problems doesn't mean it's not useful for programming.

Using AI tools as co-pilots to augment knowledge and break into areas of discipline that you're unfamiliar with is great.

Is it useful to kean on as if you were a junior developer? No, absolutely not. Is it a useful tool that can augment your knowledge and capabilities as a senior developer? Yes, very much so.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

They answered this further down - they never tried it themselves.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

I never said that.

I said I found the older methods to be better.

Any time I've used it, it either produced things verbatim from existing documentation examples which already didn't do what I needed, or it was completely wrong.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It also works great for book or movie recommendations, and I think a lot of gpu resources are spent on text roleplay.

Or you could, you know, ask it if gasoline is useful for food recipes and then make a clickbait article about how useless LLMs are.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I took it as just pointing out how “not ready” it is. And, it isn’t ready. For what they’re doing. It’s crazy to do what they’re doing. Crazy in a bad way.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I don't mind the crazy answers as long as they're attributed. "You can use glue to stop cheese from sliding off your pizza" - bad. "According to fucksmith on reddit [link to post], you can use glue...". That isn't so great either but it's a lot better. There is also a matter of the basic decency of giving credit for brilliant ideas like that.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

At least it gave credit to a reddit user when it suggested to a suicidal person that they could jump from the Golden Gate Bridge!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Who doesn't like getting lawyer PMs because you made a dark joke on a meme subreddit? (Or in future fediverse)

[–] [email protected] 25 points 5 months ago

/r/shittyaskreddit wasn't supposed to be an instruction manual 🙄

[–] [email protected] 25 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Its great that with such a potentially dangerous, disruptive, and obfuscated technology that people, companies, and societies are taking a careful, measured, and conservative development path...

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Move fast and break things, I guess. My take away is that the genie isn't going back in the bottle. Hopefully failing fast and loud gets us through the growing pains quickly, but on an individual level we'd best be vigilant and adapt to the landscape.

Frankly I'd rather these big obvious failures to insidious little hidden ones the conservative path makes. At least now we know to be skeptical. No development path is perfect, if it were more conservative we might get used to taking results at face value, leaving us more vulnerable to that inevitable failure.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Its also a first to market push (which never leads to robust testing), and so we have to hope that each and every one of those mistakes encountered are not existentially fatal.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 5 months ago (1 children)

AI is the best tool for recognizing satire and sarcasm, it could never ever misconstrue an author's intentions and is impeccable at understanding consequences and contextual information. We love OpenAI.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago

I'm sure the basilisk will see through all this bootlicking.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 5 months ago

Isn’t this just all what the AI plot of Metal Gear Solid 2 was trying to say? That without context on what is real and what’s not the noise will drown out the truth

[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I googled gibbons and the Ai paragraph at the beginning started with "Gibbons are non-flying apes with long arms..." Way to wreck your credibility with the third word.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

non-flying apes

bwahaaaaa

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Where's the lie? I just can't trust you "gibbons can fly" people.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

I don't believe gibbons can fly, but they should lead with something more relevant like "gibbons are terrestrial as opposed to aquatic apes." ;)

I am scared of what Google ai thinks of the aquatic ape hypothesis.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I like how the article slams USB 3.2 vs USB 4.0 but ignores that Google was saying " As of August 202_4_ "... A date that notable has not yet occurred.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

For people who have a really hard time with #2 (memorable passwords), here's a trick to make good passwords that are easy to remember but hard to guess.

  1. Pick some quote (prose, lyrics, poetry, whatever) with 8~20 words or so. Which one is up to you, just make sure that you know it by heart. Example: "Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!" (That's from Ozymandias)
  2. Pick the first letter of each word in that quote, and the punctuation. Keep capitalisation as in the original. Example: "LomW,yM,ad!"
  3. Sub a few letters with similar-looking symbols and numbers. Like, "E" becomes "3", "P" becomes "?", you know. Example: "L0mW,y3,@d!" (see what I did there with M→3? Don't be too obvious.)

Done. If you know the quote and the substitution rules you can regenerate the password, but it'll take a few trillion years to crack something like this.

  1. Home Remedies for Appendicitis // If you’ve ever had appendicitis, you know that it’s a condition that requires immediate medical attention, usually in the form of emergency surgery at the hospital. But when I asked “how to treat appendix pain at home,” it advised me to boil mint leaves and have a high-fiber diet.

That's an issue with the way that LLM associate words with each other:

  • mint tea is rather good for indigestion. Appendicitis → abdominal pain → indigestion, are you noticing the pattern?
  • high-fibre diet reduces cramps, at least for me. Same deal: appendicitis → abdominal pain → cramps.

(As the article says, if you ever get appendicitis, GET TO A BLOODY DOCTOR. NOW.)


And as someone said in a comment, in another thread, quoting yet another user: for each of those shitty results that you see being ridiculed online, Google is outputting 5, 10, or perhaps 100 wrong answers that exactly one person will see, and take as incontestable truth.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (7 children)

Steps 2 and 3 of your method already make it way too hard to remember

Just pick like 6 random, unconnected, reasonably uncommon words and make that your entire password

Capitalize the first letter and stick a 1 at the end

The average English speaker has about 20k words in their active vocab, so if you run the numbers there's more entropy in that than in your 11 character suggestion.

Alternatively use your method but deliberately misquote it slightly and then just keep it in its full form.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago

Ideally, do the picking with a random word generator too, since humans are bad at randomly picking anything.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (4 children)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Or, like, use bitwarden or something to do it for you.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

Don't get me wrong, password managers are fucking great. But sometimes you need to remember a password. (Including one for Bitwarden itself.)

[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago

Being a bit pedantic here, but I doubt this is because they trained their model on the entire internet. More likely they added Reddit and many other sites to an index that can be referenced by the LLM and they don’t have enough safeguards in place. Look up “RAG” (Retrieval-augmented generation) if you want to learn more.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Somewhat amused that the guy things "UW" universally means "University of Wisconsin". There are lots of UWs out there, and the AI at least chose the largest (University of Washington), though it did claim that William Taft was class of 2000.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Even for Wisconsin, UW is the system. There's UW Lacrosse, UW Milwaukee, UW Madison, UW Platteville, UW Whitewater...

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

We had a tool that answered all of this for us already and more accurately (most of the time). It was called a search engine. Maybe Google would work on one

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

Some of the answers are questions?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

Training on reddit especially.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

People get very confused about this. Pre-training "ChatGPT" (or any transformer model) with "internet shitposting text" doesn't cause them to reply with garbage comments, bad alignment does. Google seems to have implemented no frameworks to prevent hallucinations whatsoever and the RLHF/DPO applied seems to be lacking. But this is not "problem with training on the entire web". You can pre-train a model exclusively on a 4-chan database that with the right finetuning you would see a perfectly healthy and harmless model. Actually, it's not bad to have "shitposting" or "toxic" text in the pre-training because that gives the model an ability to identify it and understand it

If so, the "problem with training on the entire web" is that we would be drinking from a poisoned well, AI-generated text has a very different statistical distribution from the one users have, which would degrade the quality of subsequent models. Proof of this can be seen with the RedPajama dataset, which improves the scores on trained models simply because it has less duplicated information and is a more dense dataset: https://www.cerebras.net/blog/slimpajama-a-627b-token-cleaned-and-deduplicated-version-of-redpajama

load more comments
view more: next ›