i’ve caught myself doing the “it’s this and that — it’s not the other” thing a few times. i dunno if it’s because i’ve seen it so many times because of AI generated comments etc and that’s become a norm in my brain, or if it was actually something i do regularly and ive just never noticed it.
it might be the latter, because i always got the title of this paper https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.02175 backwards. i used to write it adversarial examples are features, not bugs (which is apparently not correct in english language 0_o)
regardless, ive started editing it out when i notice ive done it now.
LLMs write like that because people write like that. That they used the rhetorical device three times in a row in a single paragraph makes me think it’s less likely to be LLM and just how that person writes.
So very rude. If you prefix it with "the LLM says", I'm fine with it. But taking that hot air and pretending it's yours? It's not just rude, it's dishonest.
The robots use it a lot because it's a common construct in their training data, because it's a common construct in text written by humans
i’ve caught myself doing the “it’s this and that — it’s not the other” thing a few times. i dunno if it’s because i’ve seen it so many times because of AI generated comments etc and that’s become a norm in my brain, or if it was actually something i do regularly and ive just never noticed it.
it might be the latter, because i always got the title of this paper https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.02175 backwards. i used to write it adversarial examples are features, not bugs (which is apparently not correct in english language 0_o)
regardless, ive started editing it out when i notice ive done it now.
it’s a common construct in human text *selected for the most engaging constructs by AI companies optimizing their usage metrics
Obviously any comment that doesn't match the responders exact style must be AI /s.
I can’t be the only one who finds it rude to use AI to contribute to a discussion. I find invasive I had to read what I thought was human.
Using it for translation would be different though.
LLMs write like that because people write like that. That they used the rhetorical device three times in a row in a single paragraph makes me think it’s less likely to be LLM and just how that person writes.
So very rude. If you prefix it with "the LLM says", I'm fine with it. But taking that hot air and pretending it's yours? It's not just rude, it's dishonest.
It’s not just X, it’s Y. It’s not rude, it’s hackneyed use of language.
You’re absolutely right! It’s not just X, it’s Y. /s.
Triples is best.
Yeah, sadly thought the same. I even agree with the clanker's sentiment.
like a lot of tweets in my timeline these days