Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. I've never been opposed to the word "hallucinating" for describing how AI makes mistakes ... until now.

I've never been opposed to the word "hallucinating" for describing how AI makes mistakes ... until now.

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
78 Indlæg 54 Posters 1 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • orionkidder@writing.exchangeO orionkidder@writing.exchange

    @grammargirl This is a good example of why that term is so dangerous. Thank you for posting it.

    That said, while I have zero hope of making that term go away, we also have the word "slop" as a counter.

    "Ugh. It had a hallucination..."

    "Yup. And the results are now slop."

    That said, I don't myself use "hallucination" in the "AI" context. I refer to the error rate, which last I checked, hovered around 40%.

    accordionbruce@mastodon.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
    accordionbruce@mastodon.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
    accordionbruce@mastodon.social
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #4

    @orionkidder @grammargirl
    The explanation has to include that if you believe what the AI tells you then you are hallucinating

    rndanger@infosec.exchangeR 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • orionkidder@writing.exchangeO orionkidder@writing.exchange

      @grammargirl This is a good example of why that term is so dangerous. Thank you for posting it.

      That said, while I have zero hope of making that term go away, we also have the word "slop" as a counter.

      "Ugh. It had a hallucination..."

      "Yup. And the results are now slop."

      That said, I don't myself use "hallucination" in the "AI" context. I refer to the error rate, which last I checked, hovered around 40%.

      grammargirl@zirk.usG This user is from outside of this forum
      grammargirl@zirk.usG This user is from outside of this forum
      grammargirl@zirk.us
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #5

      @orionkidder Good point.

      Also, the error rate now highly depends on which model you're talking about, but I think that's the rate for those that are most widely used -- e.g., the free models.

      orionkidder@writing.exchangeO 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • grammargirl@zirk.usG grammargirl@zirk.us

        I've never been opposed to the word "hallucinating" for describing how AI makes mistakes ... until now.

        I just talked to someone who thought AI hallucinations would be obvious because it would be obvious if you talked to a *person* who was hallucinating.

        In other words, they equated "hallucination" with "sounds wacko" and accepted AI output as true because it sounded level headed.

        1/2

        queenofnewyork@newsie.socialQ This user is from outside of this forum
        queenofnewyork@newsie.socialQ This user is from outside of this forum
        queenofnewyork@newsie.social
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #6

        @grammargirl Hm. It’s not always obvious if a person you are talking to is hallucinating, depending on what their hallucinations are and what they say.

        I get their point, just am sad on the mental illness rep side.

        grammargirl@zirk.usG fragarach@social.vivaldi.netF crypticrainfall@app.wafrn.netC 3 Replies Last reply
        0
        • queenofnewyork@newsie.socialQ queenofnewyork@newsie.social

          @grammargirl Hm. It’s not always obvious if a person you are talking to is hallucinating, depending on what their hallucinations are and what they say.

          I get their point, just am sad on the mental illness rep side.

          grammargirl@zirk.usG This user is from outside of this forum
          grammargirl@zirk.usG This user is from outside of this forum
          grammargirl@zirk.us
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #7

          @queenofnewyork Yes, I was thinking about that/wondering about that as I was posting, but that is the common perception.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • grammargirl@zirk.usG grammargirl@zirk.us

            The word "hallucination" isn't going away — it's a widely used industry term — but we need to explain it better for beginners:

            "Hallucination" is just a fancy word for "confidently makes mistakes":

            "Remember: AI hallucinates, and you need to confirm all facts" should be something like "Remember: AI confidently makes mistakes, and you need to confirm all facts" or "AI tells you things that are wrong in a way that sounds completely believable. Confirm all facts!"

            gleick@mas.toG This user is from outside of this forum
            gleick@mas.toG This user is from outside of this forum
            gleick@mas.to
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #8

            @grammargirl I don’t think we need to accept it just yet. The word is deceptive—intentionally so. What needs to be explained is this: chatbots and LLMs can't "hallucinate” because they have no minds or senses. They routinely depart from factuality because that's how they’re programmed: to generate plausible streams of text without regard to reality. (https://around.com/dont-trust-them/)

            coolcalmcollected@mastodon.socialC davemwilburn@infosec.exchangeD 2 Replies Last reply
            0
            • grammargirl@zirk.usG grammargirl@zirk.us

              I've never been opposed to the word "hallucinating" for describing how AI makes mistakes ... until now.

              I just talked to someone who thought AI hallucinations would be obvious because it would be obvious if you talked to a *person* who was hallucinating.

              In other words, they equated "hallucination" with "sounds wacko" and accepted AI output as true because it sounded level headed.

              1/2

              vatvslpr@c.imV This user is from outside of this forum
              vatvslpr@c.imV This user is from outside of this forum
              vatvslpr@c.im
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #9

              @grammargirl
              I prefer "bullshit" to "hallucination". It gets much closer to what's really happening, and it gives users a much better idea of how to deal with it.

              finitebaffle@mas.toF 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • grammargirl@zirk.usG grammargirl@zirk.us

                I've never been opposed to the word "hallucinating" for describing how AI makes mistakes ... until now.

                I just talked to someone who thought AI hallucinations would be obvious because it would be obvious if you talked to a *person* who was hallucinating.

                In other words, they equated "hallucination" with "sounds wacko" and accepted AI output as true because it sounded level headed.

                1/2

                jawnsy@mastodon.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
                jawnsy@mastodon.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
                jawnsy@mastodon.social
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #10

                @grammargirl Tools are useful, but they are never a substitute for human judgement. It's like people who write something and accept corrections from spell check without thinking about what the words mean.

                The most powerful tools are most powerful in the hands of those who can validate correctness quickly. We're still responsible for validating all facts, regardless of source. We can't outsource critical thinking to machines, which do not think at all.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • grammargirl@zirk.usG grammargirl@zirk.us

                  The word "hallucination" isn't going away — it's a widely used industry term — but we need to explain it better for beginners:

                  "Hallucination" is just a fancy word for "confidently makes mistakes":

                  "Remember: AI hallucinates, and you need to confirm all facts" should be something like "Remember: AI confidently makes mistakes, and you need to confirm all facts" or "AI tells you things that are wrong in a way that sounds completely believable. Confirm all facts!"

                  hopeward@sunny.gardenH This user is from outside of this forum
                  hopeward@sunny.gardenH This user is from outside of this forum
                  hopeward@sunny.garden
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #11

                  @grammargirl
                  Hallucinations can only happen to a mind. An LLM has no more mind than a slot machine.

                  The people making this stuff fell in love with their own convincing automatons, so attributed ‘hallucination’ as happening to their little babies.

                  It’s a much different thing if you say ‘this brainless machine is constantly making errors and spitting incorrect data’.

                  If you say that, it means back to the drawing board: this demo tech has failed.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • grammargirl@zirk.usG grammargirl@zirk.us

                    I've never been opposed to the word "hallucinating" for describing how AI makes mistakes ... until now.

                    I just talked to someone who thought AI hallucinations would be obvious because it would be obvious if you talked to a *person* who was hallucinating.

                    In other words, they equated "hallucination" with "sounds wacko" and accepted AI output as true because it sounded level headed.

                    1/2

                    sambowne@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
                    sambowne@infosec.exchangeS This user is from outside of this forum
                    sambowne@infosec.exchange
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #12

                    @grammargirl "Delusion" would have been better, but the ship has sailed.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • queenofnewyork@newsie.socialQ queenofnewyork@newsie.social

                      @grammargirl Hm. It’s not always obvious if a person you are talking to is hallucinating, depending on what their hallucinations are and what they say.

                      I get their point, just am sad on the mental illness rep side.

                      fragarach@social.vivaldi.netF This user is from outside of this forum
                      fragarach@social.vivaldi.netF This user is from outside of this forum
                      fragarach@social.vivaldi.net
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #13

                      @queenofnewyork @grammargirl
                      I think the film "A Beautiful Mind" brought home to me just how real hallucinations are to those who are experience them.
                      Which I hadn't previously appreciated.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • grammargirl@zirk.usG grammargirl@zirk.us

                        The word "hallucination" isn't going away — it's a widely used industry term — but we need to explain it better for beginners:

                        "Hallucination" is just a fancy word for "confidently makes mistakes":

                        "Remember: AI hallucinates, and you need to confirm all facts" should be something like "Remember: AI confidently makes mistakes, and you need to confirm all facts" or "AI tells you things that are wrong in a way that sounds completely believable. Confirm all facts!"

                        merileedkarr@federated.pressM This user is from outside of this forum
                        merileedkarr@federated.pressM This user is from outside of this forum
                        merileedkarr@federated.press
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #14

                        @grammargirl
                        The industry named its own mistakes ‘hallucinations.’
                        Hallucinations is a forgiving term.
                        ‘Delusions’ would be more accurate.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • vatvslpr@c.imV vatvslpr@c.im

                          @grammargirl
                          I prefer "bullshit" to "hallucination". It gets much closer to what's really happening, and it gives users a much better idea of how to deal with it.

                          finitebaffle@mas.toF This user is from outside of this forum
                          finitebaffle@mas.toF This user is from outside of this forum
                          finitebaffle@mas.to
                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                          #15

                          @VATVSLPR @grammargirl you’re backed up by academia https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • grammargirl@zirk.usG grammargirl@zirk.us

                            I've never been opposed to the word "hallucinating" for describing how AI makes mistakes ... until now.

                            I just talked to someone who thought AI hallucinations would be obvious because it would be obvious if you talked to a *person* who was hallucinating.

                            In other words, they equated "hallucination" with "sounds wacko" and accepted AI output as true because it sounded level headed.

                            1/2

                            burnt_veggies@mstdn.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                            burnt_veggies@mstdn.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                            burnt_veggies@mstdn.social
                            wrote sidst redigeret af
                            #16

                            @grammargirl As a mental health nurse, I would say delusions would be a more accurate term than hallucinations. I would also point out as someone else said that unless you are trained to do so, you may not know someone is experiencing hallucinations. Many who experience them chronically are quite good at presenting as if they aren't.

                            grammargirl@zirk.usG 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • grammargirl@zirk.usG grammargirl@zirk.us

                              I've never been opposed to the word "hallucinating" for describing how AI makes mistakes ... until now.

                              I just talked to someone who thought AI hallucinations would be obvious because it would be obvious if you talked to a *person* who was hallucinating.

                              In other words, they equated "hallucination" with "sounds wacko" and accepted AI output as true because it sounded level headed.

                              1/2

                              mattdm@hachyderm.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
                              mattdm@hachyderm.ioM This user is from outside of this forum
                              mattdm@hachyderm.io
                              wrote sidst redigeret af
                              #17

                              @grammargirl

                              "Confabulation", although that is still anthropomorphism and implies agency which doesn't exist.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • grammargirl@zirk.usG grammargirl@zirk.us

                                I've never been opposed to the word "hallucinating" for describing how AI makes mistakes ... until now.

                                I just talked to someone who thought AI hallucinations would be obvious because it would be obvious if you talked to a *person* who was hallucinating.

                                In other words, they equated "hallucination" with "sounds wacko" and accepted AI output as true because it sounded level headed.

                                1/2

                                glc@mastodon.onlineG This user is from outside of this forum
                                glc@mastodon.onlineG This user is from outside of this forum
                                glc@mastodon.online
                                wrote sidst redigeret af
                                #18

                                @grammargirl

                                I've been "opposed" to that (to the extent that it ever makes sense to oppose established language usage) from the start, favoring "fabrication".

                                All LLMs fabricate sentence-like objects which invite the user to hallucinate some meaning into them. Users then react to how they feel about the meaning that they themselves have imposed.

                                If one recognizes that all of the outputs are fabrications and that some fraction of them may be useful, one can go sanely about one's business.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • grammargirl@zirk.usG grammargirl@zirk.us

                                  I've never been opposed to the word "hallucinating" for describing how AI makes mistakes ... until now.

                                  I just talked to someone who thought AI hallucinations would be obvious because it would be obvious if you talked to a *person* who was hallucinating.

                                  In other words, they equated "hallucination" with "sounds wacko" and accepted AI output as true because it sounded level headed.

                                  1/2

                                  bwebster@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                                  bwebster@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                                  bwebster@mastodon.social
                                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                                  #19

                                  @grammargirl @Cdespinosa I propose the term “botsplaining”

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • gleick@mas.toG gleick@mas.to

                                    @grammargirl I don’t think we need to accept it just yet. The word is deceptive—intentionally so. What needs to be explained is this: chatbots and LLMs can't "hallucinate” because they have no minds or senses. They routinely depart from factuality because that's how they’re programmed: to generate plausible streams of text without regard to reality. (https://around.com/dont-trust-them/)

                                    coolcalmcollected@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                                    coolcalmcollected@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                                    coolcalmcollected@mastodon.social
                                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                                    #20

                                    @gleick @grammargirl

                                    the consistent trend of anthropomorphizing badly written programs, and the machines the programs run on, is used to make tech CEO's as a religious ruling class.

                                    they create these facsimiles of truth and reality then prop themselves up as the sole interpreters and arbiters. like any religious hierarchy.

                                    they're relying on humans ingrained need to assign importance to random objects and events and an interpreter to hand out judgement in return for taking all their money.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • grammargirl@zirk.usG grammargirl@zirk.us

                                      The word "hallucination" isn't going away — it's a widely used industry term — but we need to explain it better for beginners:

                                      "Hallucination" is just a fancy word for "confidently makes mistakes":

                                      "Remember: AI hallucinates, and you need to confirm all facts" should be something like "Remember: AI confidently makes mistakes, and you need to confirm all facts" or "AI tells you things that are wrong in a way that sounds completely believable. Confirm all facts!"

                                      mikestok@mstdn.caM This user is from outside of this forum
                                      mikestok@mstdn.caM This user is from outside of this forum
                                      mikestok@mstdn.ca
                                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                                      #21

                                      @grammargirl these folks are stealing language to whitewash a con. In my opinion.

                                      Hallucination is a deviation from the normal way healthy human minds work. The confident incorrectness presented by the companies shilling AI is working as designed.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • grammargirl@zirk.usG grammargirl@zirk.us

                                        The word "hallucination" isn't going away — it's a widely used industry term — but we need to explain it better for beginners:

                                        "Hallucination" is just a fancy word for "confidently makes mistakes":

                                        "Remember: AI hallucinates, and you need to confirm all facts" should be something like "Remember: AI confidently makes mistakes, and you need to confirm all facts" or "AI tells you things that are wrong in a way that sounds completely believable. Confirm all facts!"

                                        feisty_lemming@zeroes.caF This user is from outside of this forum
                                        feisty_lemming@zeroes.caF This user is from outside of this forum
                                        feisty_lemming@zeroes.ca
                                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                                        #22

                                        @grammargirl But what actually is the point of using it if I have to confirm all facts? Can’t I just skip the middleman?

                                        grammargirl@zirk.usG 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • grammargirl@zirk.usG grammargirl@zirk.us

                                          The word "hallucination" isn't going away — it's a widely used industry term — but we need to explain it better for beginners:

                                          "Hallucination" is just a fancy word for "confidently makes mistakes":

                                          "Remember: AI hallucinates, and you need to confirm all facts" should be something like "Remember: AI confidently makes mistakes, and you need to confirm all facts" or "AI tells you things that are wrong in a way that sounds completely believable. Confirm all facts!"

                                          drangnon@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
                                          drangnon@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
                                          drangnon@hachyderm.io
                                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                                          #23

                                          @grammargirl like when medical people call someone "confused", AI "hallucination" is a more precise term than common parlance. it basically means the bot couldn't find a plausible answer and is for some reason blocked from saying "I don't know", so it makes stuff up.

                                          that's a bit different from "confidently makes mistakes" becuase it's "confidently making stuff up entirely".

                                          I have no idea what would be a good replacement for "hallucinate" in this context, I agree that it feels deceptive as is though.

                                          benaveling@infosec.exchangeB 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Svar
                                          • Svar som emne
                                          Login for at svare
                                          • Ældste til nyeste
                                          • Nyeste til ældste
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Log ind

                                          • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          Graciously hosted by data.coop
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Hjem
                                          • Seneste
                                          • Etiketter
                                          • Populære
                                          • Verden
                                          • Bruger
                                          • Grupper