The article is too long for me. 2 of its main ideas are "Everyone using large-language models should be aware of ai hallucination and be careful when asking those models for facts." and "Firms that develop large-language models shouldn't downplay the hallucination and shouldn't force ai in every corner of tech."
There was already so much misinformation on the Web before Chatgpt 3.5. There's still so much misinformation. No need for the hallucination to worsen the situation. We need a reliable source of facts. Optimistically, Google, Openai or Anthropic will find a way to reduce or eradicate the hallucination. The Google ceo said they were making progress. Maybe true. Or maybe generic pr lie so folks would stop following up re the hallucination.
The Gemini I know is "an application-layer internet communication protocol for accessing remote documents, similar to HTTP (Hypertext Transfer Protocol) and Gopher". It's not used much but it could be part of a useful alternative to the, now Google controlled, internet. Maybe Google named their project Gemini to obfuscate a potential competitor for simple web pages (or perhaps both project teams are bad at choosing names - if Gemini isn't a human cloning machine you're doing it wrong).
Due to the nature of our work, my firm has had early access to most LLMs including Bard (now Gemini). I might be short on imagination but I honestly cannot see how LLM general search implementations can ever be fixed. There is too much garbage data for any system to be able to intelligently parse and the results of our tests were laughable. Now, if you offer LLM search that is restricted to curated datasets like "The Library of Congress" or peer reviewed scientific papers, I can see the value in that. You'll probably still have to triple check your results, but at least it can get you 80% of the way there rather than sending you in the wrong direction.
EDIT: For context, our clientele are all enterprises with very large, mission critical systems. They are not the type to use some buggy trinket just because it's new and cool.
Exactly this. We need to figure out making machines that can reason first and then we can have THEM sort the data and figure out what to feed the data pool.
But if we have a computer that can reason, we don't need LLMs at all.
yes, I find Gemini actually not bad when it comes to my specific use case of showing generic examples for R programming, so I can figure out the syntax for my actual code. I don't try to have it generate actual code for me because my topic of marine biogeochemistry is far too specific for it to have any idea how to work with it. Unlike ChatGPT, which often makes up nonsense functions or hallucinates whole packages, Gemini seems to do ok. I also found it pretty good for generating images of natural subjects. It did the best job of generating a pic of a giant clam of any image generator I've tried. I would never trust factual information from Gemini. So like Google+, it's a pretty good product that in no way should be shunted into search results, Google Docs and other places where its output is not relevant, yet that is exactly the trap Google is falling into again.
With Gemini you can let it show you search results for (some) of its statements. It's useful for cross-checking: I was, for example, researching plastics recycling and there was a claim that seemed untrue and corporate. The automagic search/source function for that statement led me to a blog post of some consortium/lobbying group
of manufacturers. After telling that to Gemini it apologized and compiled a list of different view points for that specific statement.
I was pretty impressed with that, and I find it very useful for researching topics I know basically nothing about. Of course it's not the sole source of truth.
Google made it invite only when people actually wanted to try it. Then when people got tired of waiting and no longer interested, Google tried to push it to everyone.
It's a shame they had to cram it down people's throat. It would've been a fantastic alternative to Facebook. I especially liked it's friend organization feature with circles.
It was really much better than fb and other platforms, really easy to group and filter content on it.
I just hated their forced integration with YouTube comments section which only served to artificially pump up the number of G+ users. Great platform, bad management decisions.
Funny that Blue Sky just did that same old thing. Launched like a VIP club with a limited guest list. Even though that tactic hasn’t really worked well for most people since the 00’s.
The more I use ChatGPT and the like, the more I realize "the old ways" is usually just faster and easier. At best, I might use it to point me in the right direction instead. Which is very helpful, but it's nowhere near good enough to be a replacement for most of its applications.
I know the article is about Gemini but people are realizing that AI isn't replacing anything any time soon way faster than the people making it.
To be fair many companies who said you have to return to work did this as they knew they had to do lay offs. It is cheaper if people just leave and you don't have to pay a severance pay.
There's such a disconnect between the discussion on line about this and my experience in the real world.
I work in tech and it's probably at least partially situational, but everyone in my office that I talk to about this agrees that working in office is more productive. Everyone wants the flexibility to work from home, and my company is still hybrid, but it's universally agreed that the office is better. Granted I know some people left after we went hybrid from full wfh, and I'm sure some of those who left would be in disagreement.
But for instance, I'm a senior engineer and the juniors often ask for help from me multiple times during the day...if we're both in the office. If one or both of us is home, I rarely hear from them. I don't see how this isn't a clear indication of lost productivity and learning from them.
But when you see this discussion online, the people arguing that WFH is just as good or better drown out the other voices.
Don't get me wrong, I understand that commuting sucks and for the employees who is better, and I hope it stays that way. But I struggle to believe that from a business productivity perspective it's better to be fully remote.
I agree that in office can be more productive. Otherside of the coin, many places aren’t a single monolithic office or even campus. These giant tech companies forcing RTO results in people driving into an office to get the same experience as at home. (Aka on zoom calls all day)
I dunno, you really come across as an engineer who doesn't like to use Zoom or Teams. Yes it can be easy to point at a piece of paper in front of someone, but there's nothing to stop you from getting on a call a couple of times a day for a few minutes each.
I was 100% WFH for about a decade before the pandemic. I'm perfectly fine with both teams and zoom. When I finally got my previous company on board for webex (the company was split in 2 small locations, and then me WFH), and then eventually a move to teams, it was great. I like in person meetings better, for sure, but I've long been very comfortable using video meetings.
And while I agree there is nothing actually stopping people from jumping on zoom, my experience is that there is a lot more psychological friction because it doesn't happen nearly as much as it does when we are in the same physical space. And this doesn't even touch on all the times I'm talking to someone else about something, and another person overhears me and either has a similar question or something to add. And it almost reads as if you are saying I should schedule meetings with these people to meet a couple of times a day, but that would be even more painful.
People on my team have a question, I start up Zoom and we chat for 5 minutes. I have a question for my boss that's too big for Slack? Well we'll just Zoom for a few minutes.
You definitely don't want an ad hoc ticketing system, but nothing wrong with ad hoc meetings, especially if you're trying to capture the random encounters that occur in the office.
But this is my point. . .when I'm in the office they'll just turn around and ask me, on average, close to 3 questions a day. If it averages below 3 questions per week when one or both of us is WFH, I wouldn't be surprised.
I'm not saying that there is no way to make it happen, but that it simply doesn't happen. (Although I will say the ad hoc jump-in is something that can't happen over video chat. . .unless everyone is always in the room, which is even worse than working in an office lol) I can't explain why, but the barrier to initiating a conversation is much higher when it's not just "turn around and ask" and instead "send a message."
But if people don't go back to the office, commercial real estate will crash, they'll convert it all into affordable housing, and my curb appeal will lose its sweet, sweet premium value.
Let's not pretend there isn't a micromanaging control issue involved in this, but the core is all about real estate.
This. I work in commercial real estate and it’s kind of hard to turn into house. It’s cheaper for them to just knock it down and start over.
The issue is the electricity and plumbing. In a commercial building these tend to run up and down the middle or just one side of the building. Apartments need to equally have access to utilities so they’d had to do a ton of construction to move plumbing and wiring into the correct places.
Also, I really want malls to be turned into mixed use facilities. Like all the small stores are apartments and the big anchoring spaces on the ends of the mall would be grocery stores and shopping. Imagine you forgot to pick up milk after work so you just walk to the other end of the mall and buy it. I love that idea.
Yeah, just look at how many abandoned buildings there are in most big cities. Seems like everything just expands outwards with new buildings rather than demolishing/converting old ones.
How come no one wants to talk about all the small business closing and people losing their jobs. This is a real tangible impact that shouldn’t be dismissed. I live in a big city and we’re all feeling the impact of people not returning to office work. Lack of revenue (small business, real estate, retail) is going to play a huge role in city budgets in the coming years. I work from home so I understand the appeal. Still, I don’t know how we, the city, come out of this.
America doesn't have communities. In a normal civilized country there would be grand plazas, city centers, districts to walk/shop/eat/live life.
We have work/home/and maybe a night out sometimes. We shouldn't be offloading thr responsibilities of city planners and band-aiding small business by forcing companies to hire in office staff.
We need better, more efficient cities in America, it is the reason everything is going to hell here.
Most cities west of the Mississippi river and really anything that's had a growth spurt since about the 1970s/80s. Half of the South there are cities with "historic downtown [this place]" signs all over an area that is slowly deteriorating and basically unused compared to the new main drag that is a freeway with the big box stores and fast food on the side.
Philadelphia was laid out before sprawl and when both parties worked at building stuff instead of being dedicated to tearing down government or being a big tent where everyone can argue with each other.
Sounds like you’re comparing a small town to a major city. We do have places in this country that meet your demands. And then there are smaller communities that don’t. And because lots of people prefer suburban sprawl over the convenience of living in a city, they may need to commute to where big business is.
If your small town is near an interstate or train track, and has open land, you may be lucky enough to have a decent size business break ground. Now more people can live closer to work. And now more people move to that town. And more small businesses open to support the growing community. And not far down the highway a mega strip mall opens. And within a few miles you have more homes and schools going up and now that train track has a train station. Congratulations, you now live in a small city. You got any sidewalks? Did they save any of that open land for parks? How’s the infrastructure holding up? How’s traffic?
That’s exactly what happening in the town I grew up in. I hated it and moved to an actual city. Life is relaxing and convenient and full of life. I have no car and use a bike public transportation. I more often walk to the stores and restaurants (those that haven’t closed yet). I engage with people (minimally) and find little joys in my daily life.
Now, imagine all of this if everyone just worked from home. There would be no need for a large corporate building or more homes or stores or schools. You’d have to drive further to the places where people live more densely for your everyday items. Or just rely on the miracle of the internet for someone to drop it at your door. Because as much as lots of people like suburban sprawl, they love not having to interact with anyone IRL.
Outside of Philadelphia is a region called The Mainline. It gets its name from the regional rail system that connects affluent suburbs with the city. I can’t tell you how many people I’ve spoken with who complain about living in the suburbs and having to drive one of the worst highways in the country for their morning commute. When I ask why they simply don’t drive a few minutes to the station and take a train in to their place of work, they look at me as if I had two heads. Because people don’t want to interact with anyone IRL. They rather waste hours a day in the confines of their own vehicle and scream so no one can hear them.
It’s not the cities that need to be fixed. It’s the American mentality of individualism and false security in isolation. This needs to change and then the cities will naturally follow in revival.
So, while I greatly appreciate the work from home perspective, there’s more to the story than real estate losing value.
Yeah, and driving to park in a massive parking lot that takes an additional 5 minutes to get inside a store is not a shopping plaze, and no open air malls with no actual communities near them don't count as a "Third place"
It is not the question anymore whether work at home is better or work at the office. It is not the question whether you go back to the place where you have worked before.
It is big bosses fabricating excuses for laying off people.
How? They have closed your old office long ago. Now they tell you that another place in a different state is "your" office. Now go and "return" to there. Or they have hired you for WfH with no plans to ever work in an office, and now they tell you to "return" to somewhere.
And then you can watch them moaning and whining how so many of their employees people just do not want to "return", and therefore they need stronger policies...
Working from home has its pros and cons. Fortunately, in my experience, the pros are all mine and the cons are all someone else's. That kind of colours my judgement.
Happened with someone's audio once, for some reason the sound of him pissing and sighing in satisfaction wasn't getting filtered out. I just sat there wondering why nobody was muting him yet couldn't bring myself to do it because of how funny and awkward it was.
Previously our office was 2/3 WFH/office hybrid, which everyone interpreted as "2 days from home regardless of how long week was." They recently put their foot down and said it's actually 3 days in the office no matter how long the week is...but also all managers have to be in the office 5 days.
So my personal experience contradicts your claim. Do you have any evidence to back it up?
I can't make any sense of this. If your argument is that it sometimes happens, I would be surprised if it were untrue. But your claim implied that it's common, rather than just your personal experience.
There was a fun video that got a lot of public views from WebMD in the last ~week. Wherein some of the execs appeared to be mandating RTO from a green screen of an office.
Just the biggest example that comes immediately to mind.
I would need to know more because what if they were currently all out of the office and they were mandating everyone, including themselves, go back in? It was the same thing when my company announced it, we were all at home and the head of my division, also at home, had a meeting where he, from home, told us all that we would be returning to the office.
Now he's back in the office 5 days a week and we're all 3 days.
computerworld.com
Hot