this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2025
502 points (96.1% liked)

Microblog Memes

8129 readers
3035 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] lautre@jlai.lu 14 points 3 days ago (2 children)

LLM sucks at maths, sucks at chess, sucks at remembering stuff and being consistent ... They suck at everything a computer is usually good at.

[–] SparroHawc@lemmy.zip 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

It's a very specialized program intended to get a computer to do something that computers are generally very, very bad at - write sensible language about a wide variety of topics. Trying to then get that one specialized program to turn around and do things that computers are good at, and expect to do it well, is very silly.

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

Yes, LLMs are designed to emulate how a human would respond to a prompt by digesting a huge amount of human-generated content. They can do that fairly well except when they can't.

[–] Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone 126 points 5 days ago (3 children)

It also demonstrates how much AI companies mislead the public on what their products can do. If a guy is selling lawnmowers that actually just generate grass clippings without mowing the lawn, you’re not an idiot for thinking it was going to mow grass.

[–] not_IO@lemmy.blahaj.zone 22 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

furthermore. companies mislead journalists, investors, philosphers, influencers etc. most of which dont have a technical background but a lot of reach. They then carry their misunderstanding into the general public.

All these public "academic" panel debates on conferences about AGI being the next nuclear weapon and singularity. They lead to Highbrow publications, opinion peaces, books and blog articles, which then lead to tweets, memes and pop cultural references

[–] LongLive@lemmy.world 18 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Huh.... wait... what if we make a box... generate electricity bills... Call it a crypto miner?

Cram a bunch of space heaters into a box. Convince investors that all the electricity it burns up means it's basically printing money. The building will inevitably burn down before anyone can investigate our claims.

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

But once someone explains it to you and you insist the grass was mowed, they show you the unmowed grass, and you still insist it's great for mowing lawns.

And also you're in the desert where you shouldn't even have a fucking lawn, and you plant more lawns because they're so easy to mow now

What do you call that? Because it's a bit past 'idiot'.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 58 points 5 days ago (6 children)

Using an LLM to play chess is like using autocorrect to write a novel.

And that's the big problem with AI right now. People don't understand what it is, they just want the label slapped on to as many things as possible.

AI is the new IoT, it will be integrated into everything, less than useless for 99.9% of consumers, and yet, still wildly successful.

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 9 points 4 days ago (1 children)

It's because the venture capitalists who are sinking BILLION$ into these things are calling it AI even though it's not and literally never will be. And unfortunately, too many people are too stupid to understand that these aren't AI but Generative Adversarial Networks or GAN's for short. Which doesn't sound as sexy and "take my money please"-ish as Artificial Intelligence or ✨AI✨ does.

These will never be HAL9000 or Jarvis or even Roku's Basilisk. The stuff needed for that kind of "intelligence" doesn't exist in these things. And the sooner people come to realize that this is all just digital snake oil the sooner we can collectively get on with our lives.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 11 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Using an LLM to play chess is like using autocorrect to write a novel.

Better than Rowling

[–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 5 days ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Son_of_Macha@lemmy.cafe 3 points 4 days ago

Given how much it costs it will need to be ten times more successful than web search to even hop to break even. It's the biggest dot com bubble yet.

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

The brain dead morons who defend it and accuse me of just being a hater for understanding any part of it are the worst.

I literally no longer believe personhood is a thing because of how stupid and oblivious they're capable of being.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Una@europe.pub 76 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I mean, you literally have whole videos on YouTube made by GothamChess who shows how LLMs play chess. They literally spawn pieces from air, play moves that are illegal etc.

[–] TheBat@lemmy.world 21 points 5 days ago (1 children)
[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 5 days ago

New response just dropped

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 54 points 5 days ago (20 children)

Hundreds of billions of dollars spent

No profitable product

No consistently usable product other than beginner code tasks

Massive environmental harms

Tens of thousands of (useful!) careers terminated

Destroyed Internet search, arguably the one necessary service on the Internet

No chance it's going to get better

Atari 2600 beating it at chess is a perfect metaphor. People who want to complain about it can bite its plastic woodgrain printed ass.

load more comments (20 replies)
[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Asking ChatGPT to play chess is like asking someone who's not played Chess to play well, and then documenting how poorly it played. Like no shit the hammer did a bad job as a saw. You wanted it cut, you should have used the tool for the job.

ChatGPT isn't Deep Blue. It's not made for that. You're asking a word processor to calculate pi.

[–] DerArzt@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

Yes but there are many out there that don't have this sort of understanding and believe the LLMs can do almost anything.

There people are the higher ups at large companies...

[–] albert180@piefed.social 55 points 5 days ago (3 children)

I'm quite sure that the guy understood pretty well what LLMs can do. He just wanted to deinflate all the bullshit promises by Techbros

[–] Shardikprime@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

Man that sucks

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 days ago

Nobody thought it would do very well. This was a software dev's little diversion.

We should praise attempts to make the public aware of the limitations of LLMs, not laugh at the guy who did this.

[–] ieatpwns@lemmy.world 26 points 5 days ago (4 children)

I bet the llm doesn’t even know what en passant is

[–] baropithecus@lemmy.world 13 points 5 days ago
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Etterra@discuss.online 12 points 4 days ago

They could probably have done better by training a crow to play chess.

[–] ssfckdt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 days ago (2 children)

That's a very good move! To counter, you should follow these three principles:

  • Prepare a response move that will prevent a future good move.

  • Defend your own pieces and try to attack theirs.

  • Don't be too eager to sacrifice pieces in order to make short term gains.

  • Be prepared to sacrifice an unimportant piece to make a good gain.

If you want to make a good move, try Rook H8 -> G7.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] vala@lemmy.world 23 points 5 days ago

LLMs can't beat anyone or anything at chess because they can't play chess at all. Try it. They don't get more than a few moves in without degrading into total nonsense.

[–] ThatGuyNamedZeus@feddit.org 18 points 5 days ago (3 children)

I don't know if this is real, but AI for chess kinda has to be tailor made for chess, right?

[–] vala@lemmy.world 42 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Yes the point is that LLMs don't reason.

[–] Broadfern@lemmy.world 43 points 5 days ago

These articles aren’t written for people who know how LLMs work or what they do, anyway.

It’s to prove to everyday people that the techbro marketing is bullshit and these are limited tools, not conscious beings. The populace is being sold a hammer that hallucinates and told everything is a nail.

[–] ThatGuyNamedZeus@feddit.org 12 points 5 days ago

I fuck around with AI chatbots every now and then. Sometimes I'll type in one thing to it and it will spit out a respone that doesn't have anything to do with what I said to it

maybe it's the way I type and form sentences, but yeah, a lot of ai "generated" stuff won't be what you typed in

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] don@lemm.ee 16 points 5 days ago

By my best feelings, this shit is a bigger bust than the .com bubble, and I predate that latter shit by roughly twenty years.

[–] Pippipartner@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 5 days ago (3 children)

I'm quite sure that you could use a LLM to play chess and probably even successful, but you need to train it on chess notation of games instead of a pile of fanfiction and other copyright infringements. I have considered trying that but was turned off by how inaccessible LLM training is and how difficult it would be to get a sufficient amount of games written in proper chess notation. Obviously this would not be a real LLM, as it does not "speak", but I was curious how well this would work utilizing the same technique.

[–] Zwiebel@feddit.org 15 points 5 days ago (1 children)

It's called AlphaZero and is the best chess engine to date

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Honytawk@feddit.nl 8 points 5 days ago (1 children)

You shouldn't train an LLM for that, just any other type of machine learning.

You don't need text to play chess.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Takapapatapaka@lemmy.world 8 points 5 days ago

Okay, i think there is quite a misunderstanding here.

Some older versions of LLMs (chatgpt3.5-turbo-instruct) can play chess relatively well (around 1750 Elo) : here is a link to an article studying that.

Some points :

  • it is of course way worse than almost any algorithm designed for chess
  • one of the reason we cannot get these result back (at least not that good, here is a link to a blog post of someone making recent LLMs chatbots better at chess) could be that we do not have access to pure completion mode on models trained on selected data (where they could purposefully choose only good chess matches), and those are now hidden behind a chatbot layer instead.
  • it seems to reveal that models have a somehow accurate representation of the chess board when predicting chess moves
  • it seems to have a quite unique feat that is : if you feed them a prompt that say they play as a very good player, and then the beginning of a game with a blatant bad move (giving away a queen for example), they sometimes play the entire game with moves that purposefully give away pieces, as if they guess that the only reason they would lose a piece that easily is by purposefully losing them. It has close to zero utility, but it's interesting anyway.
[–] Pacattack57@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Chess engines don’t have real difficulties. Every level of the chess engine is designed to make more blunders as the elo gets smaller.

In other works it is programmed to make bad moves in regular intervals. What that means is even on beginner modes when the engine isn’t blundering it is playing perfect chess. This is why it isn’t good to play against chess bots. At best you will learn some pattern recognition but chess puzzles are better at that.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 points 3 days ago

In CoD MW 2 (or maybe Black Ops) the multiplayer AI bots were like this. Obviously all bots are but the kill cams were illuminating. And they didn't even try to make it look human. They'd even use a light machine gun. They'd walk around. Once they see you they'd turn towards you. The only thing the difficulty changed was how fast they turned. Then they'd shoot a single shot at your head. For things like a sniper rifle it looked mostly believable, but that's not how people use machine guns lol. The single shot with the most inaccurate weapon is just dirty lmao.

load more comments
view more: next ›