Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by taberiand 502 days ago
That's a feature that would need to be implemented. There's no reason to think it could look at the image of the plot it generated automatically, but feeding it the image it generated back to it is no different to if it did view it automatically
1 comments
Dylan16807 502 days ago
The point of telling it to explore the data is so I don't have to think of every angle myself. Humans can get an understanding from visuals that LLMs can't match, apparently, even without gimmicks.
link
taberiand 501 days ago
The llm is able to see the gorilla when shown the image in the same way you would show a human an image.

Imagine if you gave someone the raw data and told them to write code to graph the output but on to a screen they couldn't see. They would not be able to tell you it's a gorilla until you turn the monitor around and show them.

Humans are still better at seeing the image, sure (for now), but the llm is a tool with certain features and abilities. You can't make up a scenario that is misusing the tool and then pretend that it doesn't work - especially when it seems you want it to use it without applying your own brain power to the process

And to be clear, I'm open to criticism of llms and exploration of their limitations - but I'm tired of hearing complaints that amount to PEBKAC.

link
Dylan16807 501 days ago
When I tell a human to analyze the data, I sure don't expect them to interpret it as "write code to graph it to a screen you can't see". You found the problem but glossed right over it.

> misusing the tool and then pretend that it doesn't work

It was told to analyze and then it did a bad job of analyzing. I don't care if an LLM expert expects this already, it's worth pointing out to everyone else. It's not PEBKAC.

link
krageon 501 days ago
If a user misunderstands the purpose and value of a tool, this is PEBKAC.
link
Dylan16807 501 days ago
The tool doesn't succeed at a reasonable task that humans can do. That's not PEBKAC, and warning people about it is a good thing.

This type of analysis is not outside the purpose of the tool. You're making excuses at this point. Do you really think it would be wrong to add that capability in the future?

It's a technical limitation, one that is far from obvious.

link
taberiand 501 days ago
I think you think the llm is a magic box with an intelligent being inside that can magically do whatever you want it to, somehow. It is software. It has capabilities and limitations. Learn them, and use it appropriately. Or don't, you don't have to use it. But don't expect it to just do whatever you think it should do.
link