Half of LLM users (49%) think the models they use are smarter than they are, including 26% who think their LLMs are “a lot smarter.” Another 18% think LLMs are as smart as they are. Here are some of the other attributes they see:

  • Confident: 57% say the main LLM they use seems to act in a confident way.
  • Reasoning: 39% say the main LLM they use shows the capacity to think and reason at least some of the time.
  • Sense of humor: 32% say their main LLM seems to have a sense of humor.
  • Morals: 25% say their main model acts like it makes moral judgments about right and wrong at least sometimes. Sarcasm: 17% say their prime LLM seems to respond sarcastically.
  • Sad: 11% say the main model they use seems to express sadness, while 24% say that model also expresses hope.
  • JackFrostNCola@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    4 hours ago

    "Half of LLM users " beleive this. Which is not to say that people who understand how flawed LLMs are, or what their actual function is, do not use LLMs and therefore arent i cluded in this statistic?
    This is kinda like saying ‘60% of people who pay for their daily horoscope beleive it is an accurate prediction’.

  • kromem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Wow. Reading these comments so many people here really don’t understand how LLMs work or what’s actually going on at the frontier of the field.

    I feel like there’s going to be a cultural sonic boom, where when the shockwave finally catches up people are going to be woefully under prepared based on what they think they saw.

  • blady_blah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 hours ago

    You say this like this is wrong.

    Think of a question that you would ask an average person and then think of what the LLM would respond with. The vast majority of the time the llm would be more correct than most people.

  • Akuchimoya@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    22 minutes ago

    I had to tell a bunch of librarians that LLMs are literally language models made to mimic language patterns, and are not made to be factually correct. They understood it when I put it that way, but librarians are supposed to be “information professionals”. If they, as a slightly better trained subset of the general public, don’t know that, the general public has no hope of knowing that.

    • WagyuSneakers@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      7 hours ago

      It’s so weird watching the masses ignore industry experts and jump on weird media hype trains. This must be how doctors felt in Covid.

      • Llewellyn@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        42 minutes ago

        It’s so weird watching the masses ignore industry experts and jump on weird media hype trains.

        Is it though?

  • fubarx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    11 hours ago

    “Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.” ― George Carlin

  • notsoshaihulud@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 hours ago

    I’m 100% certain that LLMs are smarter than half of Americans. What I’m not so sure about is that the people with the insight to admit being dumber than an LLM are the ones who really are.

  • Comtief@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    12 hours ago

    LLMs are smart in the way someone is smart who has read all the books and knows all of them but has never left the house. Basically all theory and no street smarts.

    • joel_feila@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Bot even that smart. There a study recently that simple questiona like “what was huckleberry finn first published” had a 60% error rate.

      • Comtief@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 hour ago

        yeah my analogy is not so good… LLMs suck with factual stuff, they are better with coding or languages (Claude has been really helpful to me with Estonian).

      • Comtief@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Well yes, they are glorified text autocomplete, but they still have their uses which could be considered “smart”. For example I was struggling with a programming thing today and an LLM helped me out, so in a way it is smarter than me in that specific thing. I think it’s less that they are dumb and more that they have no agency whatsoever, they have to be pushed into the direction you want. Pretty annoying…