• sudneo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 hours ago

    That is my experience, it’s generally quite decent for small and simple stuff (as I said, distillation of documentation). I use it for rust, where I am sure the training material was much smaller than other languages. It’s not a matter a prompting though, it’s not my prompt that makes it hallucinate functions that don’t exist in libraries or make it write code that doesn’t compile, it’s a feature of the technology itself.

    GPTs are statistical text generators after all, they don’t “understand” the problem.

    • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      59 minutes ago

      It’s also pretty young, human toddlers hallucinate and make things up. Adults too. Even experts are known to fall prey to bias and misconception.

      I don’t think we know nearly enough about the actual architecture of human intelligence to start asserting an understanding of “understanding”. I think it’s a bit foolish to claim with certainty that LLMs in a MoE framework with self-review fundamentally can’t get there. Unless you can show me, materially, how human “understanding” functions, we’re just speculating on an immature technology.