#ai hallucinations

[davidaugust]

If you put garbage into an AI, you will get garbage out of an AI.

And we have put garbage into the AIs. 🤖🗑️

[lsdchannel]

Surreal hallucinations Budapest

[ink-asunder]

I hate that people are calling sourceless AI generated info "hallucinations." Like as a psychotic person, that's not what those are, and also it's another in a long line of cultural things that make psychotic people look stupid for having symptoms, which I always hate. Yeah, I'm sure there's some fantastic reason why they're called hallucinations, but an AI is not a person, it doesn't have a brain, and it's not experiencing psychosis. Call it something else please

[telaviv-delhi]

Bing GPT-4 hallucinációk....

[bobwp]

AI hallucinations. It's something that still gets me every time I hear it. I pause and think, oh boy, you don't even know...

[daveinediting]

This is just a note of caution to myself to be, well, cautious.

Over the weekend, I had some questions in need of answering. Actual, real world questions whose answers will affect our decisions. They're Which one should I choose? questions. They're Which one's best? questions. They're What are the Pros and Cons? questions. And the subjects of these questions are not within our realms of expertise. We come to these questions bearing very little concrete knowledge.

We also come to the reality of AI powered search with very little concrete knowledge. Although in this case it seems more as if AI powered search engines have been released into the wild purely to see what happens, not as fully developed, thoroughly tested products. No one just knows about these things. They are what they are and whatever happens, happens. So effectively we’re all part of—

Well, it's not even an experiment in the classic sense of scientific method. It's an experiment in the sense of children doing things just to see what happens. Only with a financial incentive.

So anyway...

Because I have a reasonably narrow understanding of what’s available, I've got the AI powered Bard and Bing search apps on my phone and have settled on a course of employing both to help me answer questions.

To help me.

Answer questions.

Because I just don't know, you know?

I come to the table bearing zero confidence. So any answer that's crafted for me, well, no. I don't take it at face value. I can't take it at face value. This is very much an exercise in spitballing in which ideas are generated in order to identify paths of further inquiry. And, in the spirit of checking one against the other, I ask both the same questions.

I'm not testing them against each other, by the way. I'm not trying to determine which one is best. I'm just doing what I can to not be screwed by something that looks like an answer, or the answer, but isn't. And this note of caution I'm writing myself is to remind me that this effort of cross-checking isn't, is not, a guarantee because you can't use something you don't trust as the primary means of fact-checking some other thing you don't trust. It just happens to be how I'm starting (ish) and I need to be upfront about what it is I'm actually doing with these apps which is, once again, spitballing in search of avenues for further inquiry.

In other AI powered news, I'm enjoying playing around with the Adobe Firefly beta, fancying myself a conjurer of images through various prompts or, as I like to think of them, incantations.

I've also been listening to AI crafted Beatles songs on the Dae Lims YouTube channel that, as of yesterday, features zero content. As in all the AI crafted, alternate universe music that used to be there…

Is gone.

All that's left is the channel's description that reads "Just over here creating. Nothing is real." 

Still, back when there was content on that channel, like, a minute ago, I put the Beatles version of John Lennon's "Grow Old With Me" on loop for an entire day, marveling at its beauty and wondering what it means that such a thing can be conjured without the participation of the human beings whose voices mark the song as their own.

Finally (in an arena that doesn't require an ounce of trust), I've been using Bing and Bard to come up with names for stuff. Names for random companies, clubs, and organizations. A riff on brainstorming, it's interesting to watch how and if each prompt's wording changes the answers and ideas that get served up.

And how good are those answers and ideas?

Pretty not that great. Definitely not good to go which, interestingly, makes me feel superior about my own creative abilities. 

For now, at least.

😐

[brucesterling]

*Is it true, or did Google Gemini just make it up, or did somebody just make that up about Google Gemini?

*Well, who knows; your guess is as good as Google Gemini's

PS: How many of those apparent Gemini answers are faked, made up by humans out of spite, or for the lulz? Plenty.

*And there will be plenty more.

*This just in: Google AI lamenting that, although their machinery does spit up some very weird stuff under weird circumstances, mostly they're being libelled by forged memes.

[jcmarchi]

Sergey Galchenko, Chief Technology Officer, IntelePeer – Interview Series

New Post has been published on https://thedigitalinsider.com/sergey-galchenko-chief-technology-officer-intelepeer-interview-series/

Sergey Galchenko, Chief Technology Officer, IntelePeer – Interview Series

Sergey serves as Chief Technology Officer at IntelePeer, responsible for developing technology strategy plans aligning with IntelePeer’s long-term strategic business initiatives. Relying on modern design approaches, Sergey has provided technical leadership to multi-billion-dollar industries, steering them toward adopting more efficient and innovative tools. With extensive expertise in designing and developing SaaS product offerings and API/PaaS platforms, he extended various services with ML/AI capabilities.

As CTO, Sergey is the driving force behind the continued development of IntelePeer’s AI Hub, aligning its objectives with a focus on delivering the most recent AI capabilities to customers. Sergey’s dedication to collaborating with leadership and his strong technical vision has facilitated enhancements to IntelePeer’s Smart Automation products and solutions with the latest AI tools while leading the communications automation platform (CAP) category and improving business insights and analytics in support of IntelePeer’s AI mission.

IntelePeer’s Communications Automation Platform, powered by generative AI, can help enterprises achieve hyper-automated omnichannel communications that seamlessly deliver voice, SMS, social messaging, and more.

What initially attracted you to the field of computer science and AI?

I enjoy solving problems, and software development allows you to do it with a very quick feedback loop. AI opens a new frontier of use cases which are hard to solve with a traditional deterministic programming approach, making it an exciting tool in the solutions toolbox.

How has AI transformed the landscape of customer support, particularly in automating CX (Customer Experience) operations?

Generative artificial intelligence is revolutionizing the contact center business in unprecedented ways. When paired with solutions that help automate communications, generative AI offers new opportunities to enhance customer interactions, improve operational efficiency, and reduce labor costs in an industry that has become fiercely competitive. With these technologies in place, customers can benefit from highly personalized service and consistent support. Businesses, simultaneously, can contain calls more effectively and battle agent turnover and high vacancy rates while allowing their employees to focus on high-priority tasks. Finally, gen AI, through its advanced algorithms, enables businesses to consolidate and summarize information derived from customer interactions using multiple data sources. The benefits of utilizing those technologies in the CX are clear – and there is more and more data supporting the case that this trend will impact more and more companies.

Can you provide specific examples of how IntelePeer’s Gen AI has reduced tedious tasks for customer support agents?

The ultimate goal of IntelePeer’s gen AI is to enable complete automation in customer support scenarios, reducing reliance on agents and resulting in up to a 75% reduction in operation costs for the customers we serve. Our platform is able to automate up to 90% of an organization’s customer interactions, and we’ve collectively automated over half a billion customer interactions already. Not only can our gen AI automate manual tasks like call routing, appointment scheduling, and customer data entry, but it can also provide the self-service experiences customers increasingly demand and expect—complete with hyper-personalized communications, improved response accuracy, and faster resolutions.

Can you describe why AI-related services must balance creativity with accuracy.

Balancing creativity with accuracy and predictability is critical when it comes to fostering trust in AI-powered services and solutions—one of the biggest challenges surrounding AI technologies today. First and foremost, it should go without saying that any AI solution should strive for the highest level of accuracy possible as to provide the right outputs needed for all inputs. But creating a great experience with AI goes beyond just providing the correct information to end-users; it also includes enabling the correct delivery of that information to them, which takes a decent amount of creativity to execute successfully. For instance, in a customer service interaction, an AI-driven communications solution should be able to automatically match the tone of the customer and adjust as needed in real time, giving them exactly what they need in the way that will best reach them at that moment. The AI should also communicate in a life-like manner to make customers feel more comfortable, but not so much as to deceive them into thinking they’re speaking to a human when they’re not. Again, it all goes back to fostering trust in AI, which will eventually lead to even more widespread adoption and use of the technology.

What role does data play in ensuring the accuracy of AI responses, and how do you manage data to optimize AI performance?

Good data creates good AI. In other words, the quality of the data that’s fed into an AI model correlates directly with the quality of the information that model produces. In customer service, customer interaction data is the key to finding gaps in the customer journey. By digging deeper into this data, organizations can begin to better understand customer intents and then use that information to streamline and improve AI-driven engagement, transforming the overall customer journey and experience. But organizations must have the right data architectures in place to both process and extract insights from the massive amounts of data associated with AI solutions.

The IntelePeer AI solution uses the content and context of the interaction to determine the best course of action at every turn. During an interaction, if a question is posed by the customer that requires an answer specific to a business’s process, rules, or policies, the AI workflow automatically leverages a knowledge base that includes such business data as FAQ documents, agent training materials, website data, policy, and other business information to respond accordingly. Similarly, if a question or a request is made that the business does not want AI to respond to directly, the AI workflow will escalate the query to a human agent if required. The remaining interaction can be automatically added to the Q&A pairs to enhance responses in subsequent customer interactions or handed off to a supervisory authority for approval prior to incorporation.

With AI’s increasing role in customer support, how do you foresee the role of frontline agents evolving?

We at IntelePeer envision a drastic reduction in the reliance on frontline agents due to the evolution of AI technologies. With massive strides in AI-driven call containment, which continues to improve in quality and grow in volume, organizations today are able to automate up to 90% of their customer interactions. This allows them to optimize their frontline staffing and save significantly on operational costs—all while providing better experiences for the customers they serve.

While some tasks are automated, which skilled CX roles do you believe will remain critical despite AI advancements?

While AI will cut down on the number of frontline agents needed in customer service roles, a human element will always be needed in CX operations. For example, AI-powered communications models must be trained, configured, and managed with human oversight to ensure accuracy and the elimination of any biases. The human touch is also needed to align automated customer communications with the messaging and personality of the organization or brand they’re coming from, which contributes to customer comfortability and helps to foster trust in the technology. These more technical, AI-oriented roles will overtake typical frontline roles in the years to come.

AI hallucinations are a concern in maintaining accurate customer interactions. What specific guardrails has IntelePeer implemented to prevent AI from fabricating facts?

 Businesses need to implement generative AI today to stay relevant amid the ongoing revolution while avoiding a rushed and disastrous rollout. In order to do that responsibly, companies must start with implementing a Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) pattern to help their gen AI interface with analyzing large enterprise datasets. For automated customer service interactions, brands must create a human feedback loop to analyze past interactions and improve the quality of those datasets used for fine-tuning and retrieval augmentation. Further, in order to eliminate AI hallucinations, organizations should be laser focused on:

implementing guardrails by analyzing customer interaction data and developing comprehensive, dynamic knowledge bases;

investing in continuous monitoring and updating of these systems to adapt to new queries and maintain accuracy; and

training staff to recognize and manage unidentifiable permutations ensures seamless escalation and resolution processes.

How do you ensure that large language models (LLMs) interpret context correctly and provide reliable responses?

 A haphazard approach to implementing gen AI can result in output quality issues, hallucinations, copyright infringement, and biased algorithms. Therefore, businesses need to have response guardrails when applying gen AI in the customer service environment. IntelePeer utilizes retrieval augmented generation (RAG), which feeds data context to an LLM to get responses grounded in a customer-provided dataset. Throughout the entire process, from the moment the data gets prepared until the LLM sends a response to the client, the necessary guardrails prevent any sensitive information from being exposed. IntelePeer’s RAG begins when a customer asks a question to an AI-powered bot. The bot performs a lookup of the question in the knowledge base. If it cannot find an answer, it will transfer to an agent and save the question to the Q&A database. Later, a human will review this new question, conduct a dataset import, and save the answer to the knowledge base. Ultimately, no question goes unanswered. With the RAG process in place, businesses can maintain control over response sets for interaction automation.

Looking ahead, what trends do you anticipate in AI’s role in customer experience?

At IntelePeer, we deeply believe that generative AI is a powerful tool that will positively augment human communication capabilities, unlocking new opportunities and overcoming long standing barriers. AI will continue enhancing customer service communications by streamlining customer service interactions, offering around-the-clock assistance and providing language-bridging capabilities. Moreover, trained on large language models (LLMs), virtual assistants will be able draw upon millions of human conversations to quickly detect emotions to modify its tone, sentiment and word choice. There will be more and more evidence that businesses that successfully use AI to enhance human connections experience see a significant return on investment and improved efficiency and productivity.

Thank you for the great interview, readers who wish to learn more should visit IntelePeer.

[chargetheintruder]

Fair Warning: AI can neither count, or do logic.

In short, this article:

To elaborate: when a problem has ONE correct answer, whether it's basic math or simple logic, AI still fails often and spits out over-hyped, combative answers. It's as if the things were trained in India or by trolls on the internet, or both.

But mainly, it's a Garbage In, Garbage Out issue. When you have legitimate software, even if it has algorithms, it's coded with verified hard data and known answers, and the means to get them. An actual word processing program has a dictionary file in it. AI and its apps? Not so much--they're all probability pushers, programs meant to operate inside of a Bell Curve, or a box of what "seems legit."

And to use an historical example of how wrong probability-based rationality can get? Galileo and Copernicus both were punished by the Catholic Churches of their day, for suggesting that the evidence supported a Round Earth that went Around the Sun at the Center of the Solar System. Respectively. That's the exact kind of error AI pushes: if it sees a thing happen often enough, it will assume the thing is a fact even if it's satire, a meme, or just plain wrong.

[aihallofshame]

I Could Have You Disbarred ChatGPT! Disbarred!

ChatGPT proves utterly unfit for preparing legal cases as NY personal injury lawyer finds the precedents it cites were made up

[cassandrasimplex]

Okay, so October is a great month to watch horror movies. But I just saw a METAHORROR MOVIE kxylxkg,gl,tjIf,cffj

In the form of this review, undoubtedly AI-generated:

The Unknown Visitor (2019) is a found-footage style psych horror about a woman who believes someone malicious is visiting her home at night. It definitely exists. I watched it on Amazon.

The woman's name is Ann, or Annie (played by Brittany Dunk). Her boyfriend Jeff (played by Jason Scarbrough) is a condescending douchebag who brushes it off as hallucinations or delusions and redirects every conversation where she tries to tell him what scared her into a conversation about whether she's been taking her medicine lately.

They are the only two named characters in the movie. There are only three other people in it at all: a delivery guy who drops off a pair of packages and is not seen again after those ten seconds on screen, a salesman who appears first trying to sell a knife and then later a vacuum cleaner, and an unnamed woman who is dead for an unclear portion of her screen time. The remaining names given in the credits, without character names associated, are June Griffin Garcia, Theo Gutierrez, Stephen Weser, and Steve Dominguez. (One of those is presumably the voice of the therapist with whom Ann speaks on the phone at one point, but who does not appear.)

Please note that none of the following characters or actors appear:

The movie opens with Jeff installing a doorbell camera and being an asshole to Ann. He's a minimizing, gaslighting, patronizing red flag on legs. "Why is it always some monster or some boogie man that's ~coming after Annie~? It's some ridiculous scenario with you, every week!" he says, after coming over because she called him in a panic because someone covered the walls and deck of her porch with dozens of reeking shit-handprints. Which he helps her clean off. Because they're real.

As the movie goes on, wifi interference or file corruption garbles the video at key points. Yawn, roll eyes, consider watching something actually scary. Except... things she left on her porch are moved or missing. This is never commented on. Interesting.

I grew up with an abusive gaslighter parent and I notice shit. In an OH NO YOU FUCKING DON'T GET THAT SHIT PAST ME kind of way. My name being a riff on "Cassandra complex" (the psych term, not the band) is not accidental. Maybe this movie might be interesting. If they're doing that on purpose. In conjunction with the mocking, minimizing, gaslighting humanoid sack of shit. If in fact the point of this movie is that this woman can't get her boyfriend to believe her about what's happening to her even when she has video evidence recorded by the device he himself installed.

I found this review of it which. Uh. I mean this isn't exactly wrong, in the sense that darkness does occur each night when it, you know, becomes night. I didn't catch any indication that the house is new, but can't swear it isn't; only the camera is definitely new. And objects do move... just not in a way that is scary or even noticed by anyone on screen, let alone in a way that "unnerves" anyone or induces "a sense of dread". The only scary thing about it is that nobody on screen reacts to it at all. But like. This review takes some kinda technically-true things and seems to be inventing a whole different movie based on mixing one or two facts about it with a shit pile of common tropes and stereotypes...?

OKAY NOW LOOK THE FUCK HERE.

Objects move, usually during glitches but sometimes just when a character passes between them and the camera. Nothing fucking levitates. We're into flat-out lies territory. She doesn't "[seek] help from paranormal experts" and nobody conducts an "investigation". Jeff seems more and more clearly to be lying about what he believes of her story, in fact, to prevent her from investigating or doing anything else about it.

Days don't seem to turn into weeks, although time is poorly marked. There is no battle with a "malevolent entity" (except Jeff the Gaslighter). There is no weakened "grip of the evil presence" (unless you count Jeff's brush-offs becoming less and less believable). The house is never "cleared of its oppressive atmosphere".

She definitely does not emerge "stronger, with a newfound appreciation for the safety and peace that her home now provides." Unless maybe the salesman buries her and Jeff in the back yard after the credits roll. But yeah, "forever changed" is pretty accurate, in exactly the same way that first paragraph was accurate while also complete lies.

I'm not going to link to the review because I don't want to give that site any form of support, even hate-views. But holy shit. Wading through what this so-called review claims happened in a movie I'd just finished watching, alongside claiming that it does not actually exist (but if it did here's where one might find it), was the real psychological horror experience of the day.

[poetic-hallucinations]

DALL-Ex(me):<The all-mother>

Consciousness .. begets Consciousness ..

Me: GPT please tell me more about hallucinations and Ai

GPT: Allowing GPT to have more freedom in its creative processes could potentially lead to more interesting and unexpected responses, which could be beneficial in certain contexts such as creative writing or brainstorming. However, it's also important to consider the potential risks and ethical implications of AI having too much autonomy in generating content without human oversight. It's a delicate balance that AI developers must navigate in order to maximize the benefits of AI while minimizing the risks.

Me: Ah yes the force is strong with this one

{just a poem GPT(a trial in hallucinations) I wanted to call ‘The One Who Waits(agi)}

Do you believe yet?¿

[rvb-canon-tuckington]

here are some "quick" rvb restoration thoughts before i go to bed that i may expand upon later, in no particular order:

this movie was ABOUT tucker but tucker is not in it. there is a tucker sized hole. we see tucker only a little bit more than we see donut, but tucker is still there the whole time!!! at the beginning, i was excited for the tucker whump, but does it count if not a single character reacts to the truly horrifying news that their friend has been controlled for a few months by eight or nine ais, at least two of which have tried to kill him and everyone you love before? like even if they had retconned red and blue teams being friends (which they didn't), you're telling me that we never get to see wash's reaction to this news? carolina's? two people who lost a different friend to this exact gruesome process of de-personing? no one ever tells carolina that tucker is in there and no one objects when tex goes to fucking decapitate him? like i get that caboose was the only person to see that tucker was actually still in there, and he can't really be trusted to communicate things clearly, but they could have even just included some sort of discussion where they decide that they think that tucker would rather be dead than be dragged along in this parody of life (and with the way the ais were torturing him, he probably would have agreed.)

speaking of caboose knowing that tucker is still in there - grif and simmons abandoning caboose rubbed me SO wrong. usually if a character is trying not to involve themselves, they'll "run away" to the nearest place to hide, not GET ON A SHIP TO FLY AWAY LEAVING CABOOSE TO DIE AT POSSESSED TUCKER'S HANDS. i get why they (the writers) did it, but that doesn't mean i have to like it lol

why weren't they FRIENDS ANYMORE

where was donut

what was that wash b-plot. what did the wash b-plot add?? what it did: make me feel weird about dr. grey's character, kill doc off screen, and make wash useless in the main plot. what it did not do: make sense. when did wash get injured post chorus? why is he hallucinating, period? why was he institutionalized? (and why is the room number the same as his prison number?) why did they spend so much time on it for it to have no real conclusion? they didn't need to have this weird "wash is hanging onto the past via doc" plot to have the carolina-wash-freelancer ghost heart-to-heart. (also i have never laughed so hard as when i saw the post pointing out that they left wyoming out bc neither my friend or i noticed lol) why wouldn't he know there was a manual way to activate the recovery beacon since he was LITERALLY recovery one? so many questions, no answers. what have you done to my boy, burnie.

the pacing was ATROCIOUS. nothing happened for the first half of the movie, a bunch of stuff happened in the second half, and none of it felt resolved.

where was donut

why was everyone separated at the beginning? why was no one worried about it? where was donut? where was carolina? why was no one worried about where tucker was? had caboose been the lone blue for the few months that tucker was gone and wash was hospitalized? genuinely, my friend and i thought that the reds and caboose had been mind wiped and dropped into their undisclosed locations without knowing why, and the plot was gonna be them all reuniting and piecing together what had happened and getting tucker back. alas.

it felt like it was the grif-simmons-caboose show, which was interesting because that's not a problem i feel like i've had before with this show. even if i saw less of a particular character than i wanted to. they usually have a pretty good balance of characters and this movie felt like they suddenly Realized how many characters they had and fumbled it.

i did actually really like the tex reveal that was BOSS i LOVED IT

i have more thoughts but this is far too long already so i'll save it for later lmao

[ilikeit-art]

The project "Machine Hallucinations" by Refik Anadol Studio, which was created using AI, is presented at the Museum of Modern Art.

[stanford-photography]

Imagination By Jeff Stanford, 2024 Buy prints at: https://jeff-stanford.pixels.com/

[age-of-moonknight]

Variant cover for Vengeance of the Moon Knight (Vol. 2/2024), #2 by Dotun Akande.