>You’re implying 100% reliability is actually attainable. If that were the case, wouldn’t that mean the halting problem would have been solved by AI? I’m not an expert but I’ve heard that’s like one of those fundamental laws of information theory that really can’t be broken.
Nah even 100% reliability isn't attainable by a human. 100% obviously doesn't imply solving the halting problem.
100% as in 100% as reliable as a human. Even surpassing a human. Sort of in the same way as a computer now beats humans at chess.
>I think applying the sociology of hipster band fans to LLMs is a mistake
Why would it be a mistake? Human psychology is similar across all spectrums. What happens in one area is likely possible in another area. If it happens among hipster bands it can happen among hipster technology fads.
>I think there’s a temptation to apply the analogy of something like the early internet or smartphone to LLMs but those are networked products. LLMs don’t really improve with the various applications built on top of them if the LLM is itself fundamentally broken or faulty to the point that it is unsafe to use in practice.
This is a valid speculation. But it's speculation. Basically your saying that LLMs are fundamentally broken and stuck at 38% forever because of fundamental and permanent flaws. The jury on that one is still out. And your point is highly, highly speculative.
We see quantitative improvements on LLMs constantly AND this is a nascent technology we don't completely understand yet. The most probably and logical conclusion is to follow the technological trendline. That trendline is pointing up.
To speculate on fundamental flaws of the LLM when people don't even fully understand what's going on with the LLM is illogical because you can't derive conclusions from something you don't understand. We can only generalize the trendline and constant improvements we've seen in AI for the past decade. Again that trendline is pointing to further break throughs in the future.
>Obviously, I, like probably everyone else on this website would love LLMs to be reliable to a high degree.
No this is not obvious to me. I disagree. I think some people are like you but other people, for example Geoffrey Hinton are in the apocalyptic camp. Personally I'm in the middle, I think it could go either way. It will definitely harm a segment of our society by taking over work, but whether the benefits of AGI outweighs the harm remains to be seen.