When mobile phones became widespread, gathering data about people got much cheaper, but making use of that data remained difficult. Powerful LLMs could change that.
这里强调了LLMs可能改变数据利用难易度的观点,为读者提供了关于技术影响的深入洞察。
When mobile phones became widespread, gathering data about people got much cheaper, but making use of that data remained difficult. Powerful LLMs could change that.
这里强调了LLMs可能改变数据利用难易度的观点,为读者提供了关于技术影响的深入洞察。
TLDR: When working with LLMs, the risks for the L&D workflow and its impact on substantive learning are real:Hallucination — LLMs invent plausible-sounding facts that aren’t trueDrift — LLM outputs wander from your brief without clear constraintsGeneric-ness — LLMs surface that which is most common, leading to homogenisation and standardisation of “mediocre”Mixed pedagogical quality — LLMs do not produce outputs which are guaranteed to follow evidence-based practiceMis-calibrated trust — LLMs invite us to read guesswork as dependable, factual knowledge These aren’t edge cases or occasional glitches—they’re inherent to how AI / all LLMs function. Prediction machines can’t verify truth. Pattern-matching can’t guarantee validity. Statistical likelihood doesn’t equal quality.
Real inherent issue using AI for learning.
LLM-assisted essay writing
neurological study of LLMs on writing and impacts