Hacker News Reader

I find such statements frightening. Too many people can not tell the different between prevalence ("everybody does it") and factually correct.

View on HN

Nothing to do with dice though.

The whole "stochastic means to find factual correctness" thing is an error of method, arguing about weights here is nonsense.

It isn't though, the most factually correct human expert is also stochastic. The only question is how the dice are weighted.

"human expert" as reference for "factually correct", oh just gently caress yourself. Appeal to authority (expert = social status) is as much bullshit as appeal to popularity.

Right now the fully deterministic always correct oracle machine doesn't exist. The most authorative answer we can get on a subject is from a respected human in their field (who is still stochastic). It's unrealistic to hold LLMs to a higher standard than that.

"The runway is free"

- Jacob Veldhuyzen van Zanten, respected aviation expert, 1977 teneriffa, brushing off the flight engineers concern about another machine on the runway

Ok, so humans are also fallible. Your point being?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com