The tweet in question was posted today. The point here isn't to rehash how LLMs can't distinguish letters from tokens. It's to highlight how Google's AI-generated answer will grab a blatantly false fact from the internet and use it as an authoritative source for its answers.
No, it doesn’t show that. There is no source in the screenshot. It’s a screenshot of an LLM generated answer, looking exactly how they do. It’s true, however, that someone tweeted this again.
I love seeing when an LLM encounters a failure mode that feel akin to "cognitive dissonance". You can almost see them sweat as they try to explain why they just directly contradicted themselves as they spiral into a state of deeper confusion. I wonder if their response is modeled after human behavior when encountering cognitive dissonance. I'm curious how they'd behave if they had no model of human defensiveness in their training set.
Anyways I also don't enjoy anthropomorphizing language models, but hey, you went there first :)
Have GPT4o running on the background and have it type out the answers as your interviewer reads aloud the questions. Share your screen and let it find the bugs for you in real time. Never get any facts wrong as you smugly correct your interviewer about the minute details of an obscure AWS Route 53 API.
oh god, of all the amazing problems to solve with this wonderful technology, you surely did pick the most useless. What's this obsession with interviews on HN?
Hired a bunch of people in my career and 1 call was enough with a success ration of 98%
People obsess about interviews because they need to do well to get a job to make money so they won't live on the streets. The whole interview process is a total mess these days. Already filled with ML stuff to reject your application before you even get a chance at an in-person interivew.
People already use AI to punch of their resumes to make themselves look more attractive.
Doing great in a FAANG interview is life changing money for people from the lower and lower-middle classes. It can bring up your entire family. The stakes are high, which means people will use every tool to have an advantage.
Congratulations on your success ratio. If you don't mind me asking, however, what constitutes a "success" in your eyes? I also interviewed and hired / rejected many applicants through my career, but I don't know if we ever discussed our successes as a single quantitative metric. I'm interested to find out what you measured.
I "picked out" this problem to discuss here because I find the process of "approximating someone else's skills" an interesting endeavor without a clear solution. Do you think the current remote interviewing techniques are effective? Regardless of your answer, it looks like it's going to change dramatically. I find that to be interesting I guess :)
Is there any point in tattooing it on the back of the hands of people who don't read?
That said, https://readabilityformulas.com/readability-scoring-system.p... is a good sanity check. Over half of people can't read text above a grade 8 readability. Worse yet, we aren't conscious of the effort that reading takes. Not until we are struggling. So competent people have little sense of the barriers they create.
You mean like how our law enforcement works currently? Should the government all put trackers on our vehicles instead? It will consistently prevent things much worse than some students skipping class to go to the bathroom, like hit-and-runs.
This is one of the worst ideas ever. It seems like we love to treat students like they're toddlers until they're 18 then all of a sudden we expect them to act like they're autonomous adults. This isn't how you teach anyone independence.
I'd never agree. What happens if I need more than 15 minutes? Will I be deemed a bad student because I simply need more time to do my business? What does this have to do with how I learn?
