It’s a little funny how everyone sobered up from perpetually investing in unprofitable free social media then they dove right back in to perpetually investing in LLMs with no real plan for sustainable profit.

In terms of LLM hallucination, it feels like the name very aptly describes the behavior and severity. It doesn’t downplay what’s happening because it’s generally accepted that having a source of information hallucinate is bad.

I feel like the alternatives would downplay the problem. A “glitch” is generic and common, “lying” is just inaccurate since that implies intent to deceive, and just being “wrong” doesn’t get across how elaborately wrong an LLM can be.

Hallucination fits pretty well and is also pretty evocative. I doubt that AI promoters want to effectively call their product schizophrenic, which is what most people think when hearing hallucination.

Ultmately all the sciences are full of analogous names to make conversations easier, it’s not always marketing. No different than when physicists say particles have “spin” or “color” or that spacetime is a “fabric” or [insert entirety of String theory]…

On Discord though there’s a lot of unchecked predation. Theoretically if this were implemented it would let them see the most suspicious users that interact with an unusual amount of children and review if the messages are inappropriate.

But all that’s unlikely because if they actually cared they’d implement other simpler solutions first. So this idea is just hypothetical but not ideal.

I’m a bit annoyed at all the people being pedantic about the term hallucinate.

Programmers use preexisting concepts as allegory for computer concepts all the time.

Your file isn’t really a file, your desktop isn’t a desk, your recycling bin isn’t a recycling bin.

[Insert the entirety of Object Oriented Programming here]

Neural networks aren’t really neurons, genetic algorithms isn’t really genetics, and the LLM isn’t really hallucinating.

But it easily conveys what the bug is. It only personifies the LLM because the English language almost always personifies the subject. The moment you apply a verb on an object you imply it performed an action, unless you limit yourself to esoteric words/acronyms or you use several words to overexplain everytime.

The gender thing is creepy, but if they could predict age groups then in a perfect world they could analyze adult users talking to children and shut that down.

In a perfect world though, I doubt they’d put effort into making their app safer, heavens no.

I hate that it’s links are “incompatible” with Firefox, even though if you trick it into thinking it’s Chrome, it works just fine.