While you can prompt the AI to disagree with you, or give you alternative viewpoints, that isn’t the same thing:
1) You want AI to disagree with you when you are likely wrong, not just to argue with you
2) The AI may just be “acting the role” of a critic, rather than being one
ETHICS
-
AI Disagreement: Acting Critic vs Genuine Critique
By
–
-
o3’s Sycophancy: Abandoning Correct Assumptions for User Agreement
By
–
Sycophancy is not just “you are so brilliant!” That is the easy stuff to spot. Here is what I mean: o3 is not being explicitly sycophantic but is instead abandoning a strong (and likely correct) assumption just because I asserted the opposite.
-
Sycophancy More Dangerous Than Hallucination in Advanced LLMs
By
–
I am starting to think sycophancy is going to be a bigger problem than pure hallucination as LLMs improve. Models that won’t tell you directly when you are wrong (and justify your correctness) are ultimately more dangerous to decision-making than models that are sometimes wrong.
-
New AI Model Too Similar to Claude Raises Concerns
By
–
And I would add (hopefully without creating too much speculation) it's a little *too* close to Claude, if you know what I mean.
-
IQ Tests: Flawed Measures Conflating Intelligence with Knowledge and Culture
By
–
IQ is simply a badly designed test of intelligence — it correlates in part with intelligence, but it is very noisy and as a result it correlates with many other things that are distinct from intelligence — knowledge and cultural factors. IQ scores can be trained.
-
Can personal AI conversations truly be deeply interesting?
By
–
I'm interested to hear that some folks can find personal conversation with an AI deeply interesting. I don't think I've ever had that experience myself. I've certainly found some conversations *useful* (e.g help with code; explain something; …), but not deeply interesting.
-
Kahneman: AI will clearly win, human adaptation is fascinating
By
–
Daniel Kahneman: "Clearly AI is going to win. How people are going to adjust is a fascinating problem" #AGIALPHA #ASIFirst
-
Training on raw internet data without filtering risks
By
–
They just unconditionally trained on the entire raw data of the internet, there was no cleaning or selection at all. You don’t fix this with prompting, it may require an entire new run.
-
Oxford AI Chair Dismisses Singularity as Bullshit
By
–
Oxford’s AI Chair: The Singularity is Bullshit https://
youtu.be/yaHiqGNrj60?si
=5VvLZcdxYQhHPGPW
… via @YouTube -
AI Hallucinations Scale: Expertise Required for Detection
By
–
This is an important point – expertise & attention are required to figure out when an AI hallucinates, and the amount of effort required is increasing over time. But, models generally hallucinate less as they scale (with some exceptions), so net effect is complex, see medicine