Replying to an earlier post

If a piece of the model’s answer is genuinely useful, quote it and say why. “I checked with Claude and this part lines up:” works great.

It still drives me nuts when my boss does that. Especially since the next thing he sends is a bunch of AI-generated code he just wants us to copy and paste into our application. He treats anything the magic AI says as authoritative, and it overrides anything an actual person can say to him.

Replying to an earlier post

Oh yeah? Well AI systems can be useful for everyday tasks like recommendations or summaries, but their reliability depends on the context and the quality of the data they were trained on. Researchers have developed methods to measure an AI model’s confidence in its answers, which helps users assess trustworthiness in high-stakes decisions such as healthcare or finance.

So, uh, maybe you should be aware of the high quality data used in training and ask those, uh, other people who throw out LLM answers what the confidence value is before you judge. Ha, got em!

Replying to an earlier post

I am not serious at all, that first paragraph was copy pasted from an LLM button in DuckDuckGo I had to go out of my way to look for.

A lot of the big models were trained on reddit data with little indication whether there was selection for high quality content, which means to me that the overall training data quality is unreliable. If an LLM can hallucinate an answer, it can hallucinate its confidence value since that is also an answer.

In other words, I agree with your sentiment.

en