Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by az09mugen 622 days ago
I'm not overthinking it, some papers describe it [0] and [1] for example. I agree for some subjects you can deal with some error.

The problem is not how often but how bad just one single error can be. My point was on controversial topic, where a single error can deal serious damage. Yes it must be error-free like for a nuclear reactor. Just imagine a Q&A chatbot answering questions on the subject of Israel and Palestine or something else really touchy, do you really think you can afford any error/hallucination ?

[0] : https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.05746 [1] : https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.11817

1 comments

You are indeed overthinking, because I just said, very clearly, that I acknowledged the hallucination problem, and yet you're throwing citations back as if I never heard of it. How many times does one have to say "it's a known issue"?

My point was on controversial topic, where a single error can deal serious damage.

Okay, but so can a single garbage article on a search engine result. I guess one shouldn't build search engines then (unless they can be held to the same standards as nuclear reactors), because do you think we can afford even single bad result? Just imagine what will happen, etc.