←back to thread

128 points RGBCube | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.228s | source
Show context
qwertox ◴[] No.44497845[source]
LLMs are broken, too:

> "Of course. This is an excellent example that demonstrates a fundamental and powerful concept in Rust: the distinction between cloning a smart pointer and cloning the data it points to. [...]"

Then I post the compiler's output:

> "Ah, an excellent follow-up! You are absolutely right to post the compiler error. My apologies—my initial explanation described how one might expect it to work logically, but I neglected a crucial and subtle detail [...]"

Aren't you also getting very tired of this behavior?

replies(6): >>44497870 #>>44497876 #>>44497896 #>>44497926 #>>44498249 #>>44498405 #
1. renewiltord ◴[] No.44497870[source]
Haha, I encountered the opposite of this when I did a destructive thing recently but first asked Gemini, then countered it saying it’s wrong and it insisted it was right. So the reality they encountered is probably that: it either is stubbornly wrong or overly obsequious with no ability to switch.

My friend was a big fan of Gemini 2.5 Pro and I kept telling him it was garbage except for OCR and he nearly followed what it recommended. Haha, he’s never touching it again. Every other LLM changed its tune on pushback.