Just a note on AI that came to mind this morning:
AI is an echo chamber. The voice we put into it drives the response. Ask why "Why is X better than Y" and you will get a raft of paragraphs and sources.
Then ask "why is Y better than X" and you might very well get an equal and opposite set of proofs.
Now this is all well and good when one is trying to muster sources to support a conclusion he has already adopted. But using this method when constructing a prompt proves dangerous when one doesn't realize that this is what is going on. When a person uses a prompt like this without considering that it is an echo chamber, one will mistake the AI generated response with an authoritative voice supporting a position.
The individual runs the risk of confusing an echoic response with an objective collecting of facts. But the wording of the prompt excludes the viability of the other side -- it reinforces the belief that the answer produced is all there is. The person does not need to consider any other point of view because the LLM has spit out the words which support the view looked for in the prompt.
If we aren't aware of how we ask a question, we will not be aware of potential limitations on the answer.
I get the sense that this could be changed into a good speech on repentance and asking for forgiveness but I'm in a secular mode right now.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Feel free to comment and understand that no matter what you type, I still think you are a robot.