• skisnow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    19 hours ago

    It’s easy to be dismissive because you’re talking from the frame of reference of current LLMs. The article is positing a universal truth about all possible technological advances in future LLMs.

    • ThirdConsul@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      18 hours ago

      Then I’m confused what is your point on Halting Problem vis-a-vis hallucinations being un-mitigable qualities of LLMs? Did I misunderstood you proposed “return undecided (somehow magically, bypassing Halting Problem)” to be proposed solution?

      • skisnow@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        First, there’s no “somehow magically” about it, the entire logic of the halting problem’s proof relies on being able to set up a contradiction. I’ll agree that returning undecidable doesn’t solve the problem as stated because the problem as stated only allows two responses.

        My wider point is that the Halting problem as stated is a purely academic one that’s unlikely to ever cause a problem in any real world scenario. Indeed, the ability to say “I don’t know” to unsolvable questions is a hot topic of ongoing LLM research.