And they always will. You need to look at the big picture here, not individual cases. If we replaced every single car on US roads with one driven by AI - proven to be 10 times better a driver than a human - that would still mean 4,000 people getting killed by them each year. That, however, doesn't mean we should go back to human drivers and 40,000 people killed annually.
Broadly speaking, an AI driver getting stumped means it's stuck in the middle of the road - while a human driver getting stumped means plowing into a semi truck.
I'd rather be inconvenienced than killed. And from what I've seen, even our current AI drivers are already statistically safer than the average human driver - and they're only going to keep getting better.
I think the interventions here are more like: "that's a trash can someone pushed onto the road - let me help you around it" rather than: "let me drive you all the way to your destination."
It's usually not the genuinely hard stuff that stumps AI drivers - it's the really stupid, obvious things it simply never encountered in its training data before.
You seem to be focusing on LLMs specifically, which are just one subcategory of AI. Those terms aren't synonymous.
The main issue here seems to be mostly a failure to meet user expectations rather than the underlying technology failing at what it's actually designed for. LLM stands for Large Language Model. It generates natural-sounding responses to prompts - and it does this exceptionally well.
If people treat it like AGI - which it's not - then of course it'll let them down. That's like cursing cruise control for driving you into a ditch. It's actually kind of amazing that an LLM gets any answers right at all. That's just a side effect of being trained on a ton of correct information - not what it's designed to do. So it's like cruise control that's also a somewhat decent driver, people forget what it really is, start relying on it for steering, and then complain their "autopilot" failed when all they ever had was cruise control.
I don't follow AI company claims super closely so I can't comment much on that. All I know is plenty of them have said reaching AGI is their end goal, but I haven't heard anyone actually claim their LLM is generally intelligent.
Similar thing happens to me with certain subjects I mostly only ever discuss online in English or hear talked about on English-language podcasts.
Then when I try talking about them in my native language, I often realize I don't have the vocabulary for it. Depending on who I'm talking to, I'll either just drop the English term in there or have to pause and hunt for the closest equivalent in my own language - which isn't always easy.
It's a chatbot. You talk to it, and it responds in natural language. That's exactly what it's designed to do - and it does it exceptionally well, far better than any system we've had before.
Faulting it for being untrustworthy just shows most people don't actually understand this tech, even though they claim they do. Like I said before: it's a large language model - not a large knowledge model.
Expecting factual answers from it is like expecting cruise control to steer your car. When you end up in the ditch, it's not because cruise control is some inherently flawed technology with no purpose. It's because you misused the system for something it was never designed to do.
The chatbot isn't the issue here. It's the user treating it like a reliable source of information.
It's a large language model - not a large knowledge model. It gets plenty of stuff right, but that's not because it actually "knows" anything - it's just trained on a massive pile of correct information.
People trash it for the times it gets things wrong, but it should be the other way around. It's honestly amazing how much it gets right when you consider that's not even what it's built to do.
It's like cruise control that turns out to be a surprisingly decent driver too.
I've seen a few videos of this thing in action, and while I like the concept - especially that you can use the same device to mow the lawn too with the lawnmower attachment - it's still quite painful to watch it work.
Especially with snow blowing, it's just so disorganized: driving all over the place and making quite the mess. If I'm dropping 5k on an automatic snow blower, I don't want to have to clean up after it.
No. Most banks barely have physical locations anywhere and every single gas station I can think of has been there for as long as I can remember pretty much.
For no particular reason really. I don't think Proton was offering a VPN service when I switched to their email so I used few different ones and eventually landed on Mullvad and have just stuck with it since.
What ever comes pre-installed on the device. I stopped caring around the time when they stopped making cool new smarphones. It has became just a tool since.
And they always will. You need to look at the big picture here, not individual cases. If we replaced every single car on US roads with one driven by AI - proven to be 10 times better a driver than a human - that would still mean 4,000 people getting killed by them each year. That, however, doesn't mean we should go back to human drivers and 40,000 people killed annually.