• pavnilschanda@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    I’m talking about the latter. Religious people often use LLMs as well (https://apnews.com/article/germany-church-protestants-chatgpt-ai-sermon-651f21c24cfb47e3122e987a7263d348). Their knowledge is likely limited to ChatGPT so they’re likely to be vulnerable to these things. I think one of the things that worry me the most is that these people may take LLM bullshit at face value, or even worse, take them as a “divine commands”.

    • El Barto@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      I don’t follow how you went from being concerned about using profanity in research papers because of audiences such as religious communities, to being concerned about LLMs spewing inaccurate things.

      Has your original question always been about the latter?

      I love the term too but I wonder how it’ll be used in situations where profanity is discouraged

      • pavnilschanda@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yes, I was curious about about if experts want to convey the concept of LLM bullshit to certain audiences such as children’s settings (which has been solved now) or religious clergy, they’ll use the term “bullshit” or not. I apologize if I have miscommunicated that intention in my initial comment, and I always look forward to how to communicate better