• prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    17 hours ago

    And the person you replied to is saying it is not just another tool because tools are deterministic.

    • definitemaybe@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Except they’re not? Very few tools are deterministic. Only Mathematics is, and that’s only a small subset of tools.

      You’re free to argue that non-deterministic tools lack value, but that’s clearly false: OCR only exists because of lossy training machine learning algorithms. Or, going even more basic, Monte Carlo simulations are by far the most efficient method of testing entire categories of problems that are intractable deterministically.

      LLMs can be shitty, as a business practice, due to their unpredictability, but (hopefully obviously) that depends on how it’s used.

      • MajorasMaskForever@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        I’d argue that Monte Carlo is a bad example here, and is an example of a deterministic tool.

        You use a tool to create an outcome, you’re looking for an answer or a solution that you can trust.

        If you want to examine behavior of a system that has input variables across some known range, you could brute force it, try every single possible combination and wait a millennia. Or you use a monte carlo strategy, let randomness enter the simulation to build out a basic characterization. You want more detail? More confidence? Increase the number of runs. I can trust that if I increase the number of runs I gain higher fidelity, if the tool/strategy was non deterministic I couldn’t do that