• FooBarrington@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      I mean - yeah, it is? This is a well-researched part of the data pipelines for any big model. Some companies even got into trouble because their models identified as other models, whose outputs they were trained on.

      It seems you have a specific bone to pick that you attribute to such training, but it’s just such a weird approach to deny pretty broadly understood results…

        • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          No, it doesn’t. Unless you can show me a paper detailing that literally any amount of synthetic data increases hallucinations, I’ll assume you simply don’t understand what you’re talking about.

          • baines@lemmy.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 hours ago

            what paper? no one in industry is gonna give you this shit, it’s literal gold

            academics are still arguing about it but save this and we can revisit in 6 months for a fat i told you so if you still care

            ai is dead as shit for anything that matters until this issue is fixed

            but at least we can enjoy soulless art while we wait for the acceleration