Yes, exactly - while humans are "only" highly unlikely to do so.
Wasn't that the premise?
There's X% probability to get unaccountable bad advice from a human; Y% probability of same from LLM.
But the stakes are different not because X!=Y. In fact, those probabilities might as well be equal. It's not like one can do much more than vaguely intuit them.
The stakes are different because the LLM is not considered a person, and therefore, one risks less by asking it a question.
(Ostensibly, anyway.)
>Other humans are available.
Sure. Available to miss my point entirely. And then to be upset by my attempts to point it out more precisely. And then downhill from there.
Wasn't that the premise?
There's X% probability to get unaccountable bad advice from a human; Y% probability of same from LLM.
But the stakes are different not because X!=Y. In fact, those probabilities might as well be equal. It's not like one can do much more than vaguely intuit them.
The stakes are different because the LLM is not considered a person, and therefore, one risks less by asking it a question.
(Ostensibly, anyway.)
>Other humans are available.
Sure. Available to miss my point entirely. And then to be upset by my attempts to point it out more precisely. And then downhill from there.