• gamer@lemm.eeEnglish
    111·
    7 hours ago

    Why wouldn’t you want a dog in your static? Why are you a horrible person?

  • adr1an@programming.devEnglish
    291·
    12 hours ago

    That’s human-like intelligence at its finest. I am not being sarcastic, hear me out. If you told a person to give you 10 numbers at random, they can’t. Everyone thinks randomness is easy, but it isn’t ( see: random.org )

    So, of course a GPT model would fail at this task, I love that they do fail and the dog looks so cute!!

    • kaidezee@lemmy.mlEnglish
      61·
      7 hours ago

      I mean, here’s a few random numbers out of my head: 1 9 5 2 6 8 6 3 4 0. I don’t get it, why is it supposed to be hard? Sure, they’re not “truly” random, but they sure look random /:

      • Ultraviolet@lemmy.worldEnglish
        16·
        4 hours ago

        You have one of each number except 7, and you’re deliberately avoiding doubles and runs of consecutive numbers. Human attempts at randomness tend to be very idealized in that way, and as a result, less random.

      • piccolo@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        12·
        5 hours ago

        They may look random but arent truly random. Computers are terrible at it too. Thats why cryptography requires external sources to generate “true” random numbers. For example, cloudflare uses a wall of lava lamps to generate randomness for encryption keys.

      • Wizzard@lemm.eeEnglish
        8·
        7 hours ago

        I’ve got some more random numbers:

        8 6 7 5 3 0 9 1 1 2 3 5 8 1 2 4 8 1 6 3 2

        It’s not that they look random is enough - They need to BE random.

        Recheck your lava lamp Wall of Entropy and generate some real rands, scrub. (/s)

        • FermionWrangler@lemm.eeEnglish
          32·
          5 hours ago

          792654349324138383027654826548192874651875306480462765726382

          I don’t know man, that’s pretty random. I mean do you think you can predict the next numbers in the sequence just from the ones already there? Would have to predict the next batch, the way I made these come in batches. I can’t exactly produce 1 number at a time from banging on my number-pad.

          • Hawk@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
            34·
            4 hours ago

            I can make an educated guess what numbers are most likely, yes.

            For example, you have no repeat number sequences, so I can take a guess that the number 2 is less likely to be next.

            Humans have certain tendencies that makes them want to make a number only seem more random. Also, you’ve probably seen those mentalists correctly guessing seemingly random stuff. Tells you enough how easily people are fooled into thinking something specific, so random can you actually be.

            • 𝓔𝓶𝓶𝓲𝓮@lemm.eeEnglish
              1·
              46 minutes ago

              you can just throw a coin x times and here you go true randomness and in convenient binary too

              computers can’t fathom our coin tossing abilities

              though truth to be said it’s more because we are just so bad at tossing coins. not even AI can predict the result of what will happen when we start to throw shit around

              I bet it is even more random when you throw a coin while being inebriated.

              Actually say random numbers when you are drunk shitless and they will be random. Checkmate

      • SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
        2·
        6 hours ago

        Here’s another set of random digits

        1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

        :3

        After all, there’s no fundamental reason for why it can’t all just be a repeat of the same number. But it doesn’t look random, right? So what is randomness?

  • SkunkWorkz@lemmy.worldEnglish
    18·
    11 hours ago

    ChatGPT: “don’t generate a dog, don’t generate a dog, don’t generate a dog”

    Generates a dog.

  • Underwaterbob@lemm.eeEnglish
    32·
    13 hours ago

    I used to use Google assistant to spell words I couldn’t remember the spelling of in my English classes (without looking at my phone) so the students could also hear the spelling out loud in a voice other than mine.

    Me: “Hey Google, how do you spell millennium?” GA: “Millennium is spelled M-I-L-L-E-N-N-I-U-M.”

    Now, I ask Gemini: “Hey Google, how do you spell millennium.” Gemini: “Millennium”.

    Utterly useless.

    • Gloomy@mander.xyzEnglish
      44·
      7 hours ago

      Wow. I ABSOLUTLY saw an image of a dog in the middle. Our brain sure is fascinating sometimes.

    • festnt@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      34·
      15 hours ago

      “want me to try again with even more randomized noise?” literally makes no sense if it had generated what you asked (which the chatbot thinks it did)

      • joshchandra@midwest.socialEnglish
        8·
        6 hours ago

        Remember, “AI” (autocomplete idiocy) doesn’t know what sense is; it just continues words and displays what may seem to address at least some of the topic with no innate understanding of accuracy or truth.

        Never forget that ChatGPT 2.0 can literally be run in a giant Excel spreadsheet with no other program needed. It’s not “smart” and is ultimately millions of formulae at work.

    • Trainguyrom@reddthat.comEnglish
      3·
      7 hours ago

      Fellow human, you seem to be beeping like a robot. Might you need to consider visiting the human repair shop for some bench time?

    • uuldika@lemmy.mlEnglish
      26·
      22 hours ago

      a rare LessWrong W for naming the effect. also, for explaining why the early over-aligned language models (e.g. the kind that wouldn’t help minors with C++ since it’s an “unsafe” language) became absolutely psychopathic when jailbroken. evil becomes one bit away from good.

    • Pofski@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      12 hours ago

      Ask it to generate a room full of clocks with all of them having the hands at different times. You’ll see that all (or almost) all the clocks will say it is 10:10.

    • Lvxferre [he/him]@mander.xyzEnglish
      32·
      1 day ago

      It gets even worse, but I’ll need to translate this one.

      • [Input 1] Generate a picture containing a copo completely full of wine. The copo must be completely full, with no space to add more wine.
      • [Output 1] Sure! (Gemini provides a picture containing a taça [stemmed glass] only partially full of wine.)
      • [Input 2] The picture provided does not fulfill the request. Generate a picture of a copo (not a taça) completely full of wine, with no available space for more wine.
      • [Output 2] Sure! (Gemini provides yet another half-full taça)

      For context, Portuguese uses different words for what English calls a drinking glass:

      • copo ['kɔ.po]~['kɔ.pu] - non-stemmed drinking glass. The one you likely use everyday.
      • taça ['tä.sɐ] - stemmed drinking glass, like the ones you’d use with wine.

      Both requests demand a full copo but Gemini is rather insistent on outputting half-full taças.

      The reason for that is as @will_steal_your_username@lemmy.blahaj.zone pointed out: just like there’s practically no training data containing full glasses, there’s none for non-stemmed glasses with wine.

      • Arkhive (they/she)@lemmy.blahaj.zoneMEnglish
        2·
        1 hour ago

        I wonder is something like “a mason jar full to the brim with wine” would do anything interesting. As someone else pointed out the training data for containers of wine is probably disproportionately biased toward stemmed wine glasses that are filled to about the standard restaurant pour.

      • brucethemoose@lemmy.worldEnglish
        21·
        6 hours ago

        This is a misconception. Sort of.

        I think the problem is misguided attention. The word “glass of wine” and all the previous context is so strong that it “blows out” the “full glass of wine” as the actual intent. Also, LLMs are still pretty crap at multi turn multimedia understanding. They work are especially prone to repeating previous conversation.

        It should be better if you word it like “an overflowing glass with wine splashing out.” And clear the history.

        I hate to ramble, but this is what I hate most about the way big corpos present “AI.” They are narrow tools the user needs to learn how to operate, like photoshop or something, not magic genie lamps like they are trying to sell.

        • Lvxferre [he/him]@mander.xyzEnglish
          2·
          5 hours ago

          There’s no previous context to speak of; each screenshot shows a self-contained “conversation”, with no earlier input or output. And there’s no history to clear, since Gemini app activity is not even turned on.

          And even with your suggested prompt, one of the issues is still there:

          The other issue is not being tested in this shot as it’s language-specific, but it is relevant here because it reinforces that the issue is in the training, not in the context window.

          • brucethemoose@lemmy.worldEnglish
            2·
            4 hours ago

            Was just a guess. The AI is still shitty, lol.

            What I am trying to get at is the misconception: AI can generate novel content not in its training dataset. An astronaut riding a horse is the classic test case, which did not exist anywhere before diffusion models, and it should be able to extrapolate a fuller wine glass. It’s just too dumb to do it, lol.

        • Draconic NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          12·
          22 hours ago

          Yup Horde still suffers from this issue, though it seems to have more promise than the others considering the second glass is way closer to being full than anything I’ve sen from openAI or Gemini demonstrations. Maybe there’s hope to fix this issue here.

          I only tried one model so if you know of a different horde model which works better for this and actually gives a full glass please reply below letting me know, maybe even ask the horde bot to generate it right here.

          • Lvxferre [he/him]@mander.xyzEnglish
            5·
            21 hours ago

            I have considerably less experience with image generation than text generators, but I kind of expect the issue to be only truly fixed if people train the model with a bunch of pictures of glasses full of wine.

            I’ll run a test using a local tree, that is supposed to look like this:

            @aihorde@lemmy.dbzer0.com draw for me a picture of three Araucaria angustifolia trees style:flux

              • Lvxferre [he/him]@mander.xyzEnglish
                9·
                21 hours ago

                Bingo - this tree is non-existent outside my homeland, so people barely speak about it in English - and odds are that the model was trained with almost no pictures of it. However one of the names you see for it in English is Paraná pine, so it’s modelling it after images of European pines - because odds are those are plenty in its training set.

      • Focal@pawb.socialEnglish
        2·
        21 hours ago

        Wait, this seems incredible. Do you have to be in the same instance or does it work anywhere? @aihorde@lemmy.dbzer0.com Can you draw a smart phone without a rotary phone dial?

      • Lvxferre [he/him]@mander.xyzEnglish
        3·
        1 day ago

        It does for a while already. Frankly, it’s the only reason why I’d use Gemini on first place (DDG version of GPT 4-o mini doesn’t have a built-in image generator).

      • Lvxferre [he/him]@mander.xyzEnglish
        11·
        1 day ago

        It is not a completely full glass.

        it’s not supposed to be filled all the way

        What I requested is not what you’re “supposed” to do, indeed. You aren’t supposed to drink wine from glasses that are completely full. Except when really drunk. But then might as well drink straight from the bottle.

        …fuck, I played myself now. I really want some booze.

        • UnhingedFridge@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          8 hours ago

          What you’re really supposed to do is - open up the box, slap the bag, and drink directly from your adult Capri Sun.

      • NOT_RICK@lemmy.worldEnglish
        11·
        1 day ago

        Probably why it won’t put more in it. How much training data of wine in a glass will have it filled to the brim? Probably next to none.

  • sarcophagus @lemmy.worldEnglish
    14·
    21 hours ago

    The only thing I have in common with this piece of shit software is we both can’t stop thinking about silly dogs