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.
  • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Next you’ll tell me half the population has below average intelligence.

    Not really endorsing LLMs, but some people…

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

    Don’t they reflect how you talk to them? Ie: my chatgpt doesn’t have a sense of humor, isn’t sarcastic or sad. It only uses formal language and doesn’t use emojis. It just gives me ideas that I do trial and error with.

  • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    An LLM is roughly as smart as the corpus it is summarizing is accurate for the topic, because at their best they are good at creating natural language summarizers. Most of the main ones basically do an internet search and summarize the top couple of results, which means they are as good as the search engine backing them. Which is good enough for a lot of topics, but…not so much for the rest.

  • Zink@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    6 hours ago

    If I think of what causes the average person to consider another to be “smart,” like quickly answering a question about almost any subject, giving lots of detail, and most importantly saying it with confidence and authority, LLMs are great at that shit!

    They might be bad reasons to consider a person or thing “smart,” but I can’t say I’m surprised by the results. People can be tricked by a computer for the same reasons they can be tricked by a human.

    • skozzii@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      It’s sad, but the old saying from George Carlin something along the lines of, “just think of how stupid the average person is, and then realize that 50% are even worse…”

  • futatorius@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Half of all voters voted for Trump. So an LLM might be smarter than them. Even a bag of pea gravel might be.

    • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Do you think the two party system properly represents the American people?

      ChatGPT said:

      The two-party system in the U.S. has both strengths and weaknesses when it comes to representing the American people. On one hand, it provides stability and clarity, with the two major parties—Democrats and Republicans—offering distinct platforms that can help simplify voter choice. The system also ensures that one of the two parties has a majority, making governance and passing legislation easier.

      However, the two-party system can limit political diversity, as it often forces voters to choose between two parties that may not fully reflect their views. This can leave many people feeling underrepresented, particularly those with more nuanced or third-party preferences. It also tends to lead to a polarized political environment, where compromise and cooperation between different ideologies can be difficult.

      In short, while the two-party system has worked for providing structure and stability in U.S. politics, it does have drawbacks in terms of broader representation, especially for those who don’t align neatly with either major party.

      • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 hours ago

        The system also ensures that one of the two parties has a majority, making governance and passing legislation easier.

        It also tends to lead to a polarized political environment, where compromise and cooperation between different ideologies can be difficult.

        LoL! Okay, they aren’t ready yet. At least these things are fun to play with.

  • communism@lemmy.ml
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Given the US adults I see on the internet, I would hazard a guess that they’re right.

  • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    8 hours ago

    This is sad. This does not spark joy. We’re months from someone using “but look, ChatGPT says…” To try to win an argument. I can’t wait to spend the rest of my life explaining to people that LLMs are really fancy bullshit generator toys.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Already happened in my work. People swearing an API call exists because an LLM hallucinated it. Even as the people who wrote the backend tells them it does not exist

  • CalipherJones@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 hours ago

    AI is essentially the human superid. No one man could ever be more knowledgeable. Being intelligent is a different matter.