|
|
|
|
|
|
by cortesoft
2 days ago
|
|
|
I find it interesting that you are expecting a higher success rate (100.00%) for an LLM than you expect with many other things in your life with even costlier consequences. You drive in vehicles that have a much lower than 100.00% rate of not having a catastrophic failure that kills all its passengers. Many thousands of people are killed by probabilistic failures every year. Why must an LLM have 100.00% success before you would ever trust it with anything of value? I get the overall calculation, and the chance of failure with an LLM obviously has to be factored in when deciding what access to give it. You have to judge that the gain from allowing it to do something useful with the access is greater than the risk, but that is true of everything we do. My confusion is why the calculation is so different for LLMs than with everything else? Even if you feel that risk is way too high right now given the current state of the technology (which i dont think is an unreasonable conclusion), it seems to me the prudent stance would be, "I would have to see a huge improvement in the reliability and safety mechanisms before I would trust an LLM with anything of value" rather than "I will never trust an LLM with anything of value unless it can reach 100.00% success rate and a 0.00% chance of anything harmful happening" |
|
|
It is possible you replied before my edit to clarify - it's not necessarily a "never" thing, I rarely do universal / categorical negatives, but it's a strong "not right now" :)
Agree that life is risky. My threshold, due to life experiences and events, is low - to your point, I took numerous advanced and safety driving courses to lower the risk. I rode motorcycles, a fundamentally luxurious and risky endeavour, but again very mindfully to mitigate risks with education, practices, and vigilance.
For context perhaps - I'm a Oracle Certified AI professional, and have some other minor badges and certs on copilot studio and ibm Watson etc, currently leading implementation of AI on our very very very traditional ERP project (and it's an uphill battle! Everybody else is even / way more conservative than me! :-). I see tremendous, careful, opportunities for LLMs. In daily life, learning French or music theory for example, LLMS are brilliant and patient tutors.
But for me, the risk of giving LLM unbounded access to my mailbox or bank, where upper bound of risk is infinite, is not currently balanced by any such advantage.
Other people with higher risk will engage and be appropriately rewarded for their risk tolerance - such is life :)