this post was submitted on 01 May 2025
-111 points (12.2% liked)

Technology

69726 readers
3820 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 news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  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, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 3 points 4 days ago (2 children)

The two most common reasons I hear are 1) no trust in the companies hosting the tools to protect consumers and 2) rampant theft of IP to train LLM models.

My reason is that you can't trust the answers regardless. Hallucinations are a rampant problem. Even if we managed to cut it down to 1/100 query will hallucinate, you can't trust ANYTHING. We've seen well trained and targeted AIs that don't directly take user input (so can't be super manipulated) in google search results recommending that people put glue on their pizzas to make the cheese stick better... or that geologists recommend eating a rock a day.

If a custom tailored AI can't cut it... the general ones are not going to be all that valuable without significant external validation/moderation.

[–] anus@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Basically no. What you're calling tailored AI is actually low cost AI. You'll be hard pressed, on the other hand, to get ChatGPT o3 to hallucinate at all

[–] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No, not basically no.

https://mashable.com/article/openai-o3-o4-mini-hallucinate-higher-previous-models

By OpenAI's own testing, its newest reasoning models, o3 and o4-mini, hallucinate significantly higher than o1.

Stop spreading misinformation. The company itself acknowledges that it hallucinates more than previous models.

[–] anus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

I stand corrected thank you for sharing

I was commenting based on anecdotal experience and I didn't know where was a test specifically for this

I do notice that o3 is more overconfident and tends to find a source online from some forum and treat it as gospel

Which, while not correct, I would not treat as hallucination

[–] Justas@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

There is also the argument that a downpour of AI generated slop is making the Internet in general less usable, hurting everyone (except the slop makers) by making true or genuine information harder to find and verify.

[–] anus@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

What exactly is the argument?