←back to thread

Adding a feature because ChatGPT incorrectly thinks it exists

(www.holovaty.com)
1246 points adrianh | 6 comments | 07 Jul 25 14:58 UTC | HN request time: 0.84s | source | bottom
Show context
gortok ◴[07 Jul 25 23:37 UTC] No.44495659[source]▶
I think folks have taken the wrong lesson from this.

It’s not that they added a new feature because there was demand.

They added a new feature because technology hallucinated a feature that didn’t exist.

The savior of tech, generative AI, was telling folks a feature existed that didn’t exist.

That’s what the headline is, and in a sane world the folks that run ChatGPT would be falling over themselves to be sure it didn’t happen again, because next time it might not be so benign as it was this time.

replies(7): >>44495919 #>>44496083 #>>44496091 #>>44497641 #>>44498195 #>>44500852 #>>44505736 #
JimDabell ◴[08 Jul 25 08:35 UTC] No.44498195[source]▶
You sound like all the naysayers when Wikipedia was new. Did you know anybody can go onto Wikipedia and edit a page to add a lie‽ How can you possibly trust what you read on there‽ Do you think Wikipedia should issue groveling apologies every time it happens?

Meanwhile, sensible people have concluded that, even though it isn’t perfect, Wikipedia is still very, very useful – despite the possibility of being misled occasionally.

replies(2): >>44498212 #>>44498751 #
1. fzeroracer ◴[08 Jul 25 08:39 UTC] No.44498212[source]▶
OK, so how do I edit ChatGPT so it stops lying then?
replies(1): >>44498235 #
2. JimDabell ◴[08 Jul 25 08:42 UTC] No.44498235[source]▶
You have ignored my point.

A technology can be extremely useful despite not being perfect. Failure cases can be taken into consideration rationally without turning it into a moral panic.

You have no ability to edit Wikipedia to stop it from lying. Somebody can come along and re-add the lie a millisecond later.

replies(2): >>44498251 #>>44498712 #
3. fzeroracer ◴[08 Jul 25 08:45 UTC] No.44498251[source]▶
No, I didn't ignore your point. I invalidated it because you're comparing apples to oranges.

And yes, I do have the ability to edit Wikipedia. Anyone can edit Wikipedia. I can go on any page I want, right now, and make changes to the page. If someone readds a lie, then eventually we can hit consensus as other editors enter the discussion. Wikipedia's basis is formed by consensus and controlled by individuals like you and I.

ChatGPT is not. It is controlled by one company; I cannot go edit the weights of ChatGPT to prevent it from lying about my app or anything else I do. I can only petition them to change it and hope that either I have enough clout or have a legal basis to do so.

replies(1): >>44498284 #
4. JimDabell ◴[08 Jul 25 08:54 UTC] No.44498284{3}[source]▶
You’ve changed your position. This is what you originally said:

> how do I edit ChatGPT so it stops lying then?

This is what you have changed to:

> And yes, I do have the ability to edit Wikipedia.

You do not have the ability to edit Wikipedia so it stops lying, which is the relevant factor here.

5. latexr ◴[08 Jul 25 10:27 UTC] No.44498712[source]▶
No, that is not accurate. Wikipedia has a number of guardrails and such an edit war would be detected and investigated. Possibly the page protected and the offending IP or account banned.

Wikipedia edits are monitored and vandalism is taken seriously, especially on the more important pages.

replies(1): >>44507350 #
6. JimDabell ◴[09 Jul 25 07:58 UTC] No.44507350{3}[source]▶
> such an edit war would be detected and investigated.

As far as I understand Wikipedia’s rules, no it wouldn’t. Wikipedia considers it an edit war when there are three reverts in a 24 hour period. So if you remove a lie and somebody reverts that change, that is not considered an edit war. If they do it twice, it’s still not an edit war. If they do it three times, but over a greater time period than a single day, it’s still not an edit war. If somebody else re-adds the lie, it’s not an edit war either.

Regardless, it’s not important. The point I am making is that as a user, you cannot be sure that Wikipedia is not serving up lies to you.