this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2025
917 points (98.1% liked)

Technology

72580 readers
3441 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 4) 41 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] lmagitem@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 days ago

Color me surprised

[–] dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Claude why did you make me an appointment with a gynecologist? I need an appointment with my neurologist, I’m a man and I have Parkinson’s.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 days ago

While I do hope this leads to a pushback on "I just put all our corporate secrets into chatgpt":

In the before times, people got their answers from stack overflow... or fricking youtube. And those are also wrong VERY VERY VERY often. Which is one of the biggest problems. The illegally scraped training data is from humans and humans are stupid.

[–] lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Rookie numbers! Let’s pump them up!

To match their tech bro hypers, the should be wrong at least 90% of the time.

[–] atticus88th@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago
  • this study was written with the assistance of an AI agent.
[–] esc27@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

30% might be high. I've worked with two different agent creation platforms. Both require a huge amount of manual correction to work anywhere near accurately. I'm really not sure what the LLM actually provides other than some natural language processing.

Before human correction, the agents i've tested were right 20% of the time, wrong 30%, and failed entirely 50%. To fix them, a human has to sit behind the curtain and manually review conversations and program custom interactions for every failure.

In theory, once it is fully setup and all the edge cases fixed, it will provide 24/7 support in a convenient chat format. But that takes a lot more man hours than the hype suggests...

Weirdly, chatgpt does a better job than a purpose built, purchased agent.

[–] MagicShel@lemmy.zip -4 points 2 days ago

I need to know the success rate of human agents in Mumbai (or some other outsourcing capital) for comparison.

I absolutely think this is not a good fit for AI, but I feel like the presumption is a human would get it right nearly all of the time, and I'm just not confident that's the case.

[–] Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world -1 points 2 days ago

How often do tech journalist get things wrong?

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›