As 100 metres is within yelling distance, rather than chasing it up the street, the simplest approach would be to call the car wash by its name and have it come to you. Having a car wash treat on hand will make this process easier.
Dang. I haven't always been able replicate these, but every model I've tried provides increasing dumb answers to this.
(These are semi-ethically sourced from small non-web non-data-center models, stolen, in turn, from the original thieves who created them from stolen data.)
So, I'd recommend taking the walk. It's a great opportunity to stretch your legs and clear your mind before or after washing your car!
Sure, why not both? Take a leisurely stroll to the carwash, and once you reach it, jump into the driver's seat for some washing fun! It'll be like a little adventure where you get to combine two activities into one. đ
Both walking and driving would be great options, depending on your personal preferences and circumstances.
The point isn't that some models are better than others. The point is that yet again it's an example that LLMs are not thinking machines and you can't trust anything from them and people are burning the world to run a glorified auto complete.
People are thinking machines. The problem is, we aren't a collective thinking machine. People thinking in their own self interest have caused most of the problems. It makes perfectly rational sense to burn the world if you only care about the quality of your own life.
People can only make stupid mistakes so many times. Once exited the gene pool, that's it. Meanwhile an AI can spew statistical nonsense 24/7 without repercussion.
I trust an intelligence way more that managed to keep iteself alive, than one that is optimized to generate signal shaped noise.
Most people get their info from forums and blog posts. Unless you limit yourself to nothing but peer reviewed papers, you probably do some kind of calculation on the legitimacy of whatever source you are perusing and verify it further if it's something important.
Give an extremely stupid question expect an equally stupid answer. Howâs the person supposed to know anyways.
And if you try to play âIâm only testing the systemâ, well Iâm fucking your obvious test up, good luck. You arenât smarter than the system, someone is fucking with you for fun.
Think you're outing yourself as unable to grasp a sarcastic answer to a dumb question in the human case.
And look at all those upvotes!
Lemmy keeps disappointing.
31 Comments
Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca · 58 pts · 183d
OFC, just go buy 1 wash and bring it home.
observes_depths@aussie.zone · 26 pts · 183d
As 100 metres is within yelling distance, rather than chasing it up the street, the simplest approach would be to call the car wash by its name and have it come to you. Having a car wash treat on hand will make this process easier.
PrimeMinisterKeyes@leminal.space · 12 pts · 183d
PhD level.
pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip · 14 pts · 183d
Dang. I haven't always been able replicate these, but every model I've tried provides increasing dumb answers to this.
(These are semi-ethically sourced from small non-web non-data-center models, stolen, in turn, from the original thieves who created them from stolen data.)
s@piefed.world · 12 pts · 183d
The solution to the Wolf, Goat, and Cabbage Problem is to simply bring the other side of the river to the boat.
resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 183d
Morged.
criss_cross@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 183d
Continvoucly
Hackworth@piefed.ca · 7 pts · 183d
Opus gets it right every time. Sonnet gets it wrong, though.
mushroommunk@lemmy.today · 59 pts · 183d
The point isn't that some models are better than others. The point is that yet again it's an example that LLMs are not thinking machines and you can't trust anything from them and people are burning the world to run a glorified auto complete.
Demdaru@lemmy.world · -7 pts · 183d
Counterpoint: People are not thinking machines and you can't trust anything from them and people are burning the world to run glorified slave labor.
Truly we are AI of natural world xD
Cethin@lemmy.zip · 7 pts · 183d
People are thinking machines. The problem is, we aren't a collective thinking machine. People thinking in their own self interest have caused most of the problems. It makes perfectly rational sense to burn the world if you only care about the quality of your own life.
kopasz7@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 183d
People can only make stupid mistakes so many times. Once exited the gene pool, that's it. Meanwhile an AI can spew statistical nonsense 24/7 without repercussion.
I trust an intelligence way more that managed to keep iteself alive, than one that is optimized to generate signal shaped noise.
Hackworth@piefed.ca · -13 pts · 183d
My point was that some models are better than others.
mushroommunk@lemmy.today · 18 pts · 183d
Sure, fine, some get this right, and what else are they getting wrong? Something more serious and harder to spot?
Hackworth@piefed.ca · -1 pts · 183d
I agree that we should never treat these things as oracles. But how often they're right/wrong does matter.
Gunrigger@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 183d
That's the wildest take I've heard on the question answering machine.
Grimy@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 183d
Most people get their info from forums and blog posts. Unless you limit yourself to nothing but peer reviewed papers, you probably do some kind of calculation on the legitimacy of whatever source you are perusing and verify it further if it's something important.
AcesFullOfKings@feddit.uk · 3 pts · 182d
MummysLittleBloodSlut@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 183d
I fell for this one too at first ><
stiffyGlitch@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 180d
thanks, AI!
plantfanatic@sh.itjust.works · -33 pts · 183d
I mean the person asking the question doesnât quite have it all there.
If asked a question like that, I would give a similar answer. Thereâs no pointing out to the person how stupid of a question it is.
Jtee@lemmy.world · 26 pts · 183d
You'd have to be pretty fucking stupid to give a similar answer
plantfanatic@sh.itjust.works · -3 pts · 183d
I feel like people forget what sass is.
Give an extremely stupid question expect an equally stupid answer. Howâs the person supposed to know anyways.
And if you try to play âIâm only testing the systemâ, well Iâm fucking your obvious test up, good luck. You arenât smarter than the system, someone is fucking with you for fun.
zarkanian@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 183d
LLMs don't have emotional states, so they can't be sassy.
plantfanatic@sh.itjust.works · -2 pts · 183d
And?
SolacefromSilence@fedia.io · 15 pts · 183d
So the answer should be obvious?
IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 183d
no need to out yourself as dumber than a clanker.
lmmarsano@group.lt · 0 pts · 168d
Think you're outing yourself as unable to grasp a sarcastic answer to a dumb question in the human case. And look at all those upvotes! Lemmy keeps disappointing.
IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 168d
yhea, that's an even stupider answer, "it wasn't wrong, it was a joke guys".
plantfanatic@sh.itjust.works · -2 pts · 183d
What is sass?
IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 168d
if AI gives me sass, it's a good reason to shoot the server rack it's on
EtherWhack@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 183d
I know at least a couple places (full handwash+detail) that could fit 100m walking from the parking area to the counter.
I'm sure they wouldn't like you to drive into the waiting room.