Lots of middlebrow dismissal in the comments on this article, but none that actually engage with its content, at least not at the time I’m writing. Some of the dismissals seem like they only read the headline, not the article. (Shocking, I know.)
Personally, I found the article well written, and describing a very thorough set of research. I don’t doubt that there are leaders right now ceding their decision-making to LLMs, and they would do well to read this article.
>An LLM is not the colleague who critically evaluates current ideas, looks into the contextual specifics, stress-tests assumptions, and pushes back when everyone gets comfortable
Well, not if you don't ask it to, it won't.
So ask it to.
(The article, which is better than it sounds like it's going to be at first, actually does advocate that towards the end. It's worth a read.)
I watched the first half of this video before giving up. It’s sensationalized and I’m not convinced the YouTuber actually knows what he’s talking about. You’re better off reading the actual article, which is very good.
Mostly agree with everything you said. I hesitated before posting the link, but the video gets better in the second half of it... :-), and though would be a second change for people, who would fail to engage with the high quality article.
Lots of middlebrow dismissal in the comments on this article, but none that actually engage with its content, at least not at the time I’m writing. Some of the dismissals seem like they only read the headline, not the article. (Shocking, I know.)
Personally, I found the article well written, and describing a very thorough set of research. I don’t doubt that there are leaders right now ceding their decision-making to LLMs, and they would do well to read this article.
I'm missing some data to evaluate this article. If you engage a set of humans on these seven tensions, what range of bias do you get?
What else would they expect? Next token prediction virtual requires this outcome.
>An LLM is not the colleague who critically evaluates current ideas, looks into the contextual specifics, stress-tests assumptions, and pushes back when everyone gets comfortable
Well, not if you don't ask it to, it won't.
So ask it to.
(The article, which is better than it sounds like it's going to be at first, actually does advocate that towards the end. It's worth a read.)
Well of course they did! "AI" can't possibly replace Accenture or McKinsey, or lawyers!
"Harvard Just Caught AI Lying to Every Executive in America" - https://youtu.be/pd1Km6bT104
I watched the first half of this video before giving up. It’s sensationalized and I’m not convinced the YouTuber actually knows what he’s talking about. You’re better off reading the actual article, which is very good.
Mostly agree with everything you said. I hesitated before posting the link, but the video gets better in the second half of it... :-), and though would be a second change for people, who would fail to engage with the high quality article.
[dead]