cm0002@literature.cafe to Privacy@programming.dev · 2 months agoProton has respond on redditlemmy.mlimagemessage-square71linkfedilinkarrow-up1223arrow-down12cross-posted to: [email protected]
arrow-up1221arrow-down1imageProton has respond on redditlemmy.mlcm0002@literature.cafe to Privacy@programming.dev · 2 months agomessage-square71linkfedilinkcross-posted to: [email protected]
minus-squareHeartyOfGlass@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up73arrow-down11·2 months ago “You’re right to raise this…” “… and that’s on us.” Has the same kind of simpering tone you’d get out of an LLM.
minus-squaredouglasg14b@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up38arrow-down2·2 months agoWhat do you think LLMs were trained off of, my friend?
minus-squareDragonTypeWyvern@midwest.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up29·2 months agoOr any PR firm, which is why they talk like that in the first place. This does make me wonder if the AI simpers differently in different languages.
minus-squarewyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·2 months agoAre you familiar with the works of Shao Yu?
minus-squarecalcopiritus@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up13·2 months agoWhich doesn’t mean it was written by an LLM. This has been standard corporate speak from before LLMs existed.
minus-squarerefalo@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up10arrow-down3·2 months agoJust curious, what could they have possibly done instead that would satisfy you?
minus-squareHeartyOfGlass@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9arrow-down4·2 months ago… not used an LLM to write their apology? I mean, I’m satisfied. This indicates to me they don’t care. That’s all I need to hear.
minus-squarerefalo@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up4arrow-down2·2 months agoThere is no proof they used an LLM. Plus, LLMs are trained on human text anyway, who actually talk like this… it’s not like LLMs invented their own way of speaking. Would you have preferred no apology at all?
minus-squareHeartyOfGlass@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·2 months agoMy preference is for companies to not use LLMs for public communication.
minus-squarewyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·2 months agoAnd, the scholarly applause of us anons, of course. ☝🏼
minus-squareSidyctism II.@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkarrow-up3·2 months agoMeanwhile im positively surprised that there is no “sorry you are offended”-BS at all in this statement.
Has the same kind of simpering tone you’d get out of an LLM.
What do you think LLMs were trained off of, my friend?
Or any PR firm, which is why they talk like that in the first place.
This does make me wonder if the AI simpers differently in different languages.
Are you familiar with the works of Shao Yu?
Which doesn’t mean it was written by an LLM. This has been standard corporate speak from before LLMs existed.
Just curious, what could they have possibly done instead that would satisfy you?
… not used an LLM to write their apology?
I mean, I’m satisfied. This indicates to me they don’t care. That’s all I need to hear.
There is no proof they used an LLM. Plus, LLMs are trained on human text anyway, who actually talk like this… it’s not like LLMs invented their own way of speaking.
Would you have preferred no apology at all?
My preference is for companies to not use LLMs for public communication.
And, the scholarly applause of us anons, of course. ☝🏼
Meanwhile im positively surprised that there is no “sorry you are offended”-BS at all in this statement.