• TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    123
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    LLMs are an interesting tool to fuck around with, but I see things that are hilariously wrong often enough to know that they should not be used for anything serious. Shit, they probably shouldn’t be used for most things that are not serious either.

    It’s a shame that by applying the same “AI” naming to a whole host of different technologies, LLMs being limited in usability - yet hyped to the moon - is hurting other more impressive advancements.

    For example, speech synthesis is improving so much right now, which has been great for my sister who relies on screen reader software.

    Being able to recognise speech in loud environments, or removing background noice from recordings is improving loads too.

    My friend is involved in making a mod for a Fallout 4, and there was an outreach for people recording voice lines - she says that there are some recordings of dubious quality that would’ve been unusable before that can now be used without issue thanks to AI denoising algorithms. That is genuinely useful!

    As is things like pattern/image analysis which appears very promising in medical analysis.

    All of these get branded as “AI”. A layperson might not realise that they are completely different branches of technology, and then therefore reject useful applications of “AI” tech, because they’ve learned not to trust anything branded as AI, due to being let down by LLMs.

    • snooggums@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      53
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      LLMs are like a multitool, they can do lots of easy things mostly fine as long as it is not complicated and doesn’t need to be exactly right. But they are being promoted as a whole toolkit as if they are able to be used to do the same work as effectively as a hammer, power drill, table saw, vise, and wrench.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        38
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 day ago

        Exactly! LLMs are useful when used properly, and terrible when not used properly, like any other tool. Here are some things they’re great at:

        • writer’s block - get something relevant on the page to get ideas flowing
        • narrowing down keywords for an unfamiliar topic
        • getting a quick intro to an unfamiliar topic
        • looking up facts you’re having trouble remembering (i.e. you’ll know it when you see it)

        Some things it’s terrible at:

        • deep research - verify everything an LLM generated of accuracy is at all important
        • creating important documents/code
        • anything else where correctness is paramount

        I use LLMs a handful of times a week, and pretty much only when I’m stuck and need a kick in a new (hopefully right) direction.

        • snooggums@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          29
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago
          • narrowing down keywords for an unfamiliar topic
          • getting a quick intro to an unfamiliar topic
          • looking up facts you’re having trouble remembering (i.e. you’ll know it when you see it)

          I used to be able to use Google and other search engines to do these things before they went to shit in the pursuit of AI integration.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            1 day ago

            Google search was pretty bad at each of those, even when it was good. Finding new keywords to use is especially difficult the more niche your area of search is, and I’ve spent hours trying different combinations until I found a handful of specific keywords that worked.

            Likewise, search is bad for getting a broad summary, unless someone has bothered to write it on a blog. But most information goes way too deep and you still need multiple sources to get there.

            Fact lookup is one the better uses for search, but again, I usually need to remember which source had what I wanted, whereas the LLM can usually pull it out for me.

            I use traditional search most of the time (usually DuckDuckGo), and LLMs if I think it’ll be more effective. We have some local models at work that I use, and they’re pretty helpful most of the time.

            • snooggums@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 day ago

              No search engine or AI will be great with vague descriptions of niche subjects because by definition niche subjects are too uncommon to have a common pattern of ‘close enough’.

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 day ago

                Which is why I use LLMs to generate keywords for niche subjects. LLMs are pretty good at throwing out a lot of related terminology, which I can use to find the actually relevant, niche information.

                I wouldn’t use one to learn about a niche subject, but I would use one to help me get familiar w/ the domain to find better resources to learn about it.

            • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              1 day ago

              It is absolutely stupid, stupid to the tune of “you shouldn’t be a decision maker”, to think an LLM is a better use for “getting a quick intro to an unfamiliar topic” than reading an actual intro on an unfamiliar topic. For most topics, wikipedia is right there, complete with sources. For obscure things, an LLM is just going to lie to you.

              As for “looking up facts when you have trouble remembering it”, using the lie machine is a terrible idea. It’s going to say something plausible, and you tautologically are not in a position to verify it. And, as above, you’d be better off finding a reputable source. If I type in “how do i strip whitespace in python?” an LLM could very well say “it’s your_string.strip()”. That’s wrong. Just send me to the fucking official docs.

              There are probably edge or special cases, but for general search on the web? LLMs are worse than search.

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 day ago

                than reading an actual intro on an unfamiliar topic

                The LLM helps me know what to look for in order to find that unfamiliar topic.

                For example, I was tasked to support a file format that’s common in a very niche field and never used elsewhere, and unfortunately shares an extension with a very common file format, so searching for useful data was nearly impossible. So I asked the LLM for details about the format and applications of it, provided what I knew, and it spat out a bunch of keywords that I then used to look up more accurate information about that file format. I only trusted the LLM output to the extent of finding related, industry-specific terms to search up better information.

                Likewise, when looking for libraries for a coding project, none really stood out, so I asked the LLM to compare the popular libraries for solving a given problem. The LLM spat out a bunch of details that were easy to verify (and some were inaccurate), which helped me narrow what I looked for in that library, and the end result was that my search was done in like 30 min (about 5 min dealing w/ LLM, and 25 min checking the projects and reading a couple blog posts comparing some of the libraries the LLM referred to).

                I think this use case is a fantastic use of LLMs, since they’re really good at generating text related to a query.

                It’s going to say something plausible, and you tautologically are not in a position to verify it.

                I absolutely am though. If I am merely having trouble recalling a specific fact, asking the LLM to generate it is pretty reasonable. There are a ton of cases where I’ll know the right answer when I see it, like it’s on the tip of my tongue but I’m having trouble materializing it. The LLM might spit out two wrong answers along w/ the right one, but it’s easy to recognize which is the right one.

                I’m not going to ask it facts that I know I don’t know (e.g. some historical figure’s birth or death date), that’s just asking for trouble. But I’ll ask it facts that I know that I know, I’m just having trouble recalling.

                The right use of LLMs, IMO, is to generate text related to a topic to help facilitate research. It’s not great at doing the research though, but it is good at helping to formulate better search terms or generate some text to start from for whatever task.

                general search on the web?

                I agree, it’s not great for general search. It’s great for turning a nebulous question into better search terms.

        • LePoisson@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          I will say I’ve found LLM useful for code writing but I’m not coding anything real at work. Just bullshit like SQL queries or Excel macro scripts or Power Automate crap.

          It still fucks up but if you can read code and have a feel for it you can walk it where it needs to be (and see where it screwed up)

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Exactly. Vibe coding is bad, but generating code for something you don’t touch often but can absolutely understand is totally fine. I’ve used it to generate SQL queries for relatively odd cases, such as CTEs for improving performance for large queries with common sub-queries. I always forget the syntax since I only do it like once/year, and LLMs are great at generating something reasonable that I can tweak for my tables.

            • LePoisson@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              I always forget the syntax

              Me with literally everything code I touch always and forever.

      • morto@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        23 hours ago

        and doesn’t need to be exactly right

        What kind of tasks do you consider that don’t need to be exactly right?

        • Honytawk@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          Description generators for TTRPGs, as you will read through them afterwards anyway and correct when necessary.

          Generating lists of ideas. For creative writing, getting a bunch of ideas you can pick and choose from that fit the narrative you want.

          A search engine like Perplexity.ai which after searching summarizes the web page and adds a link to the page next to it. If the summary seems promising, you go to the real page to verify the actual information.

          Simple code like HTML pages and boilerplate code that you will still review afterwards anyway.

        • SheeEttin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          21 hours ago

          Most. I’ve used ChatGPT to sketch an outline of a document, reformulate accomplishments into review bullets, rephrase a task I didnt understand, and similar stuff. None of it needed to be anywhere near perfect or complete.

          Edit: and my favorite, “what’s the word for…”

        • snooggums@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Things that are inspiration or for approximations. Layout examples, possible correlations between data sets that need coincidence to be filtered out, estimating time lines, and basically anything that is close enough for a human to take the output and then do something with it.

          For example, if you put in a list of ingredients it can spit out recipes that may or may not be what you want, but it can be an inspiration. Taking the output and cooking without any review and consideration would be risky.

      • TeddE@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 day ago

        Because the tech industry hasn’t had a real hit of it’s favorite poison “private equity” in too long.

        The industry has played the same playbook since at least 2006. Likely before, but that’s when I personally stated seeing it. My take is that they got addicted to the dotcom bubble and decided they can and should recreate the magic evey 3-5 years or so.

        This time it’s AI, last it was crypto, and we’ve had web 2.0, 3.0, and a few others I’m likely missing.

        But yeah, it’s sold like a panacea every time, when really it’s revolutionary for like a handful of tasks.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        That’s because they look like “talking machines” from various sci-fi. Normies feel as if they are touching the very edge of the progress. The rest of our life and the Internet kinda don’t give that feeling anymore.

    • floofloof@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      I tried to dictate some documents recently without paying the big bucks for specialized software, and was surprised just how bad Google and Microsoft’s speech recognition still is. Then I tried getting Word to transcribe some audio talks I had recorded, and that resulted in unreadable stuff with punctuation in all the wrong places. You could just about make out what it meant to say, so I tried asking various LLMs to tidy it up. That resulted in readable stuff that was largely made up and wrong, which also left out large chunks of the source material. In the end I just had to transcribe it all by hand.

      It surprised me that these AI-ish products are still unable to transcribe speech coherently or tidy up a messy document without changing the meaning.

    • NarrativeBear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      Just add a search yesterday on the App Store and Google Play Store to see what new “productivity apps” are around. Pretty much every app now has AI somewhere in its name.

      • dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        Sadly a lot of that is probably marketing, with little to no LLM integration, but it’s basically impossible to know for sure.

    • Punkie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      I’d compare LLMs to a junior executive. Probably gets the basic stuff right, but check and verify for anything important or complicated. Break tasks down into easier steps.

      • zbyte64@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        A junior developer actually learns from doing the job, an LLM only learns when they update the training corpus and develop an updated model.

          • zbyte64@awful.systems
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Why would you ever yell at an employee unless you’re bad at managing people? And you think you can manage an LLM better because it doesn’t complain when you’re obviously wrong?