195
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by dgerard@awful.systems to c/techtakes@awful.systems
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] bitofhope@awful.systems 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Exactly, and all of this is a simple matter of having multiple models trained on different instances of the entire public internet and determining whether their outputs contradict each other or a web search.

I wonder how they prevented search engine results from contradicting data found through web search before LLMs became a thing?

[-] linearchaos@lemmy.world -5 points 3 months ago

They didn't really have to before LLM. Search engine results, in the heyday we're backlink driven. You could absolutely search disinformation and find it. But if you searched for a credible article on someone, chances are more people would have links to the good article than the disinformation. However, conspiracy theories often leaked through into search results. And in that case they just gave you the web pages and you had to decide for yourself.

[-] bitofhope@awful.systems 10 points 3 months ago

They didn’t really have to before LLM.

No shit. Maybe they should just get rid of the extra bullshit generator and serve the sources instead of piling more LLM on the problem that only exists because of it.

[-] froztbyte@awful.systems 8 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

this naive revisionist shit still standing in ignorance of easily 15y+ of SEO-fuckery (first for influence, and then for spam) is hilarious

this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2024
195 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

1427 readers
98 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS