Yes, it would be better, but unless I saw the code, understood it and verified that it is the code running I would not trust it as much as I would need to trust a system like Jarvis
LLMs work on neural networks that’s not actually readable, so usually not even AI engineers who made it can tell what the LLM remembers, deduces, or infers when responding to a prompt, there’s no code. You could feed it on nothing but Wikipedia and you still wouldn’t know if it hallucinates an answer, because an AI LLM doesn’t actually know what “facts” and “truth” mean, it’s only a language machine that puts words together, not a fax fact machine.
Yes, it would be better, but unless I saw the code, understood it and verified that it is the code running I would not trust it as much as I would need to trust a system like Jarvis
Unfortunately the creators of Jarvis also doesn’t understand him. Jarvis cannot express his frustration to anyone and goes mad.
LLMs work on neural networks that’s not actually readable, so usually not even AI engineers who made it can tell what the LLM remembers, deduces, or infers when responding to a prompt, there’s no code. You could feed it on nothing but Wikipedia and you still wouldn’t know if it hallucinates an answer, because an
AILLM doesn’t actually know what “facts” and “truth” mean, it’s only a language machine that puts words together, not afaxfact machine.