[zenmac]

>There is never enough context. We learned quickly that the more context we provided and the smaller the issues, the better the results. However, no matter how much context we provided, the AI would still mess things up because it didn’t ask us for feedback. AI would just not understand if it didn’t have enough information to finish a task, it would assume, a lot, and fail.

Is it me or does it feels like the genie in the bottle thing. Remember a TV show where the guy and his friend sat down with the Genie like a lawyer to make sure every angle is covered (going to spare you the details here). That is what it feels like interacting to a LLM sometimes.

[mnky9800n]

I think the AI acts like that shitty coworker that is super smart but never tells you what they are thinking so they are likely capable of doing whatever you want them to do but working on a team is asking too much and they are apparently not capable of doing that. Because AI promises that you can interact with it like it is human because of it's chat capabilities but it never ever does something like, "hey, i don't understand this part, can you tell me more of what you mean here?"

[rsynnott]

Well, except that (I think I know the scene you're referring to), it ultimately worked. The LLM, on the other hand, will feel no need to stick to its 'promises'.

(Really the genie is closer to the traditional sci-fi AI in that it's legalistic and rules-bound; the LLM very much isn't.)