this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2025
48 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
40273 readers
576 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think we would just be more careful with how we used the technology. E.g. don't autocomplete code if the threshold is not met for reasonable certainty.
I would argue that it's more useful having a system that says it doesn't know half the time than a system that's confidently wrong half the time
Depends on the product. From an original AI research point of view this is what you want, a model that can realize it is missing information and deviates from giving a result. But once profit became involved, marketing requires a fully confident output to get everyone to buy in. So we get what we get and not something that's more reliable.
It's not just that, it's also the fact they scored the responses based on user feedback, and users tend to give better feedback for more confident, even if wrong, responses.