LLMs work by picking the next word* as the most likely candidate word given its training and the context. Sometimes it gets into a situation where the model’s view of “context” doesn’t change when the word is picked, so the next word is just the same. Then the same thing happens again and around we go. There are fail-safe mechanisms to try and prevent it but they don’t work perfectly.
This happened to me a lot when I tried to run big models with low context windows. It would effectively run out of memory so each new token wouldn’t actually be added to the context so it would just get stuck in an infinite loop repeating the previous token. It is possible that there was a memory issue on Google’s end.
That was the answer I was looking for. So it’s simmolar to “seahorse” emoji case, but this time.at some point he just glitched that most likely next world for this sentence is “or” and after adding the “or” is also “or” and after adding the next one is also “or”, and after a 11th one… you may just as we’ll commit. Since thats the same context as with 10.
Chill dude. It’s a grammatical/translation error, not an ideological declaration. Especially common mistake if of your native language have “grammatical gender”. Everything have “gender” in mine. “Spoon” is a “she” for example, but im not proposing to any one soon. Not all hills are worth nitpicking on.
English, being a descendant of german, used to have grammatical gender. It has fallen out of favor since middle english. But there is still traces of it, such a common tradition is calling ships, vehicles, and other machines as a “she”, but some people will default to the “generic he” as well.
As I explained, this is specyfic example, I no more atrompomorphin it than if I’m calling a “he” my toliet paper. The monster you choose to charge is a windmill. So “chill” seems adequate.
In some languages, all nouns are gendered, and it’s impossible to refer to a noun without a gender. There is no “it”, only (s)he.
If you ever learn a language like that, you will make mistakes. If someone hears your mistake, hopefully they’ll be more forgiving about it than you are.
To be clear using gendered pronouns on inanimate objects is the literal definition of anthropomorphization
you really need to get over yourself. the universe does not revolve around you nor humans. the use of gendered pronouns on inanimate objects is not anthropomorphization.
You brought this unmistaken “I speak lauder and lauder on my European vacation until waiter that doesn’t speek English can finaly understand me” energy to this conversation.
It’s like the text predictor on your phone. If you just keep hitting the next suggested word, you’ll usually end up in a loop at some point. Same thing here, though admittedly much more advanced.
I just want you are the only reason that you can’t just forget that I don’t have a way that I have a lot to the word you are not even going on the phone and you can call it the other way to the other one I know you are going out to talk about the time you are not even in a good place for the rest they’ll have a little bit more mechanically and the rest is.
You can see it looping pretty damned quick with me just hitting the first suggestion after the initial I.
I think I will be in the office tomorrow so I can do it now and then I can do it now and then I can do it for you and your dad and dad and dad and dad and dad and dad and dad and dad and dad and dad
Unmentioned by other comments: The LLM is trying to follow the rule of three because sentences with an “A, B and/or C” structure tend to sound more punchy, knowledgeable and authoritative.
I used to think learning stylistic devices like this was just an idle fancy, a tool simply designed to analyse poems, one of the many things you’re most certain you’ll never need but have to learn in school.
What happend here?
LLMs work by picking the next word* as the most likely candidate word given its training and the context. Sometimes it gets into a situation where the model’s view of “context” doesn’t change when the word is picked, so the next word is just the same. Then the same thing happens again and around we go. There are fail-safe mechanisms to try and prevent it but they don’t work perfectly.
*Token
This happened to me a lot when I tried to run big models with low context windows. It would effectively run out of memory so each new token wouldn’t actually be added to the context so it would just get stuck in an infinite loop repeating the previous token. It is possible that there was a memory issue on Google’s end.
That was the answer I was looking for. So it’s simmolar to “seahorse” emoji case, but this time.at some point he just glitched that most likely next world for this sentence is “or” and after adding the “or” is also “or” and after adding the next one is also “or”, and after a 11th one… you may just as we’ll commit. Since thats the same context as with 10.
Thanks!
He?
This is not a person and does not have a gender.
Chill dude. It’s a grammatical/translation error, not an ideological declaration. Especially common mistake if of your native language have “grammatical gender”. Everything have “gender” in mine. “Spoon” is a “she” for example, but im not proposing to any one soon. Not all hills are worth nitpicking on.
This one is. People need to stop anthropomorphizing AI. It’s a piece of software.
I am chill, you shouldn’t assume emotion from text.
English, being a descendant of german, used to have grammatical gender. It has fallen out of favor since middle english. But there is still traces of it, such a common tradition is calling ships, vehicles, and other machines as a “she”, but some people will default to the “generic he” as well.
As I explained, this is specyfic example, I no more atrompomorphin it than if I’m calling a “he” my toliet paper. The monster you choose to charge is a windmill. So “chill” seems adequate.
To be clear using gendered pronouns on inanimate objects is the literal definition of anthropomorphization. So chill does not seem fair at all.
In some languages, all nouns are gendered, and it’s impossible to refer to a noun without a gender. There is no “it”, only (s)he.
If you ever learn a language like that, you will make mistakes. If someone hears your mistake, hopefully they’ll be more forgiving about it than you are.
you really need to get over yourself. the universe does not revolve around you nor humans. the use of gendered pronouns on inanimate objects is not anthropomorphization.
And you’re still fighting this windmill you claim you are so casual about…
It was explained to be a translation error from a language with pronouns for all objects. I have to disagree with you on this one.
Yeah. It would have been much more productive to poke at the “well”, which was turned into “we’ll”.
You brought this unmistaken “I speak lauder and lauder on my European vacation until waiter that doesn’t speek English can finaly understand me” energy to this conversation.
I don’t care that this person, who seems to maybe be typing English on a keyboard with a different language dictionary, misspelled some words.
I care that people in general keep talking about AI like it is living or capable of thinking.
Using ‘he’ in a sentence is a far cry from the important parts of not anthropomorphizing “AI”…
I’ve got it once in a “while it is not” “while it is” loop.
Gemini evolved into a seal.
or simply, or
It’s like the text predictor on your phone. If you just keep hitting the next suggested word, you’ll usually end up in a loop at some point. Same thing here, though admittedly much more advanced.
Example of my phone doing this.
I just want you are the only reason that you can’t just forget that I don’t have a way that I have a lot to the word you are not even going on the phone and you can call it the other way to the other one I know you are going out to talk about the time you are not even in a good place for the rest they’ll have a little bit more mechanically and the rest is.
You can see it looping pretty damned quick with me just hitting the first suggestion after the initial I.
I think I will be in the office tomorrow so I can do it now and then I can do it now and then I can do it for you and your dad and dad and dad and dad and dad and dad and dad and dad and dad and dad
That was mine haha
LLM showed its true nature, probabilistic bullshit generator that got caught in a strange attractor of some sort within its own matrix of lies.
Unmentioned by other comments: The LLM is trying to follow the rule of three because sentences with an “A, B and/or C” structure tend to sound more punchy, knowledgeable and authoritative.
Yes, I did do that on purpose.
Not only that, but also “not only, but also” constructions, which sound more emphatic, conclusive, and relatable.
I used to think learning stylistic devices like this was just an idle fancy, a tool simply designed to analyse poems, one of the many things you’re most certain you’ll never need but have to learn in school.
What a fool I’ve been.
Turned into a sea lion