this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2025
77 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
38082 readers
346 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Well, yeah, I could've told you that too but neither of us would have any proof. It's one thing to try it out and decide that it sucks for your use case and another thing to measure and quantify it somehow.
Why such a negative reaction if you apparently agree with the outcome?
Well, for one thing, it's part of a wider trend of misreporting about AI. For another, the more interesting, meaningful angle here would be why the (frankly very simplistic) research of the BBC is mismatched with the supposedly more rigorous benchmarks used for LLM quality testing and reported in new releases.
In fact, are they? What do they mean? Should people learn about them and understand them before engaging? Probably, yeah, right? But the BBC is saying their findings have "far reaching implications" without engaging with any of those issues, which are not particularly obscure or unknown in the field.
The gap between what's being done in LLM development, what is being reported about it and how the public at large understand it is bizarre and hard to quantify. I believe once the smoke clears people will have some guilt to process about it, regardless of what the outcome of the hype cycle ends up being.
Yeah, I intentionally left out the word "groundbreaking" from the title when posting, because that's a ridiculous thing to say about this research. Obviously, it could be much better.
But I would say that any attempt at rational look at LLMs in mainstream media is a step in the right direction.