[ta8645]

I've never used Claude, but Perplexity often says that no definitive information about a topic could be found, and then tries to make some generalized inferences. There's a difference between a specific implementation, and the technology in general.

In any case, it's worthwhile for people to understand the limitations of the technology as it exists today. But calling it "bullshit" is a mischaracterization; I believe based on an emotional need for us to feel superior, and to dismiss the capabilities more thoroughly than they deserve.

It's a little like someone saying in the industrial revolution, "the steam shovel is too rigid, it will NEVER have the dexterity of a man with a shovel!". And while true and important to know, it really focuses on the wrong thing, it misses the advantages while amplifying the negatives.

[krupan]

If not bullshit then what would you call it?

[ta8645]

As the technology exists today: imperfect, often prone to mistakes, and unable to relay confidence levels. These problems may be addressed in future implementations.

That's the same message, without any emotional baggage, or overly dismissive tone.

[krupan]

That would be great if those who are selling the technology described it that way. I, and apparently others, feel like maybe "bullshit" is a better counter to the current marketing for LLMs