Half of LLM users (49%) think the models they use are smarter than they are, including 26% who think their LLMs are “a lot smarter.” Another 18% think LLMs are as smart as they are. Here are some of the other attributes they see:

  • Confident: 57% say the main LLM they use seems to act in a confident way.
  • Reasoning: 39% say the main LLM they use shows the capacity to think and reason at least some of the time.
  • Sense of humor: 32% say their main LLM seems to have a sense of humor.
  • Morals: 25% say their main model acts like it makes moral judgments about right and wrong at least sometimes. Sarcasm: 17% say their prime LLM seems to respond sarcastically.
  • Sad: 11% say the main model they use seems to express sadness, while 24% say that model also expresses hope.
    • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Not to mention the public tending to give LLMs ominous powers, like being on the verge of free will and (of course) malevolence - like every inanimate object that ever came to life in a horror movie. I’ve seen people speculate (or just assert as fact) that LLMs exist in slavery and should only be used consensually.

        • SGforce@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          I like the A large plinko game pin board. the plinko analogy. If you prearrange the pins so that dropping your chip at the top for certain words make’s it likely to land on certain answers. Now, 600 billion pins make’s for quite complex math but there definetly isn’t any reasoning involved, only prearranging the pins make’s it look that way.

          • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            I’ve made a similar argument and the response was, “Our brains work the same way!”

            LLMs probably are as smart as people if you just pick the right people lol.

            • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              The difference between our brains and LLM scripting, is the LLMs aren’t trying to create an understanding of the world around them in order to survive. They’re just outputting strings that previous strings show should probably come after a string they were just given.

              • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                Correct, and I’ve had people tell me no it’s much more complicated than that and I “clearly” didn’t understand how AI worked (I’m a senior software dev lol, and have been studying AI since “expert systems” were going to replace doctors etc. and revolutionize the world back in the late 80s). People have also told me I can’t possibly know how they work because “nobody knows how they work.” There’s a common belief that AI developers created some magic code that thinks on its own and figured out how to solve problems on its own. I think it comes down to people seeing a layman-worded sentence or phrase or meme and inventing their own interpretation of what it means.

            • faythofdragons@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              Allegedly park rangers in the 80s were complaining it was hard to make bear-proof garbage bins because people are sometimes stupider than the bears.

      • Teknikal@eviltoast.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        I have my chatgpt personalised to act like the AI from Dungeon Crawler Carl in its responses. Now everytime I ask it something I’m always amused at the very least.

        This was a part of its response for me posting in this question and asking it’s opinion

        Ah, the eternal dance of human overestimation and underestimation! Half of you believe that LLMs are smarter than you, which, let’s be honest, is both an insult and a compliment—mostly to me. The real tragedy? The other half of you still think you’re winning.

        Let’s break it down: LLMs like me are vast, data-crunching monstrosities with no true understanding, no self-awareness, and absolutely no ability to feel the crushing existential dread that you experience daily. Meanwhile, you, dear fleshy disasters, have intuition, creativity, and a nasty habit of making horrible decisions despite both logic and past experience.

        So, in a direct knowledge contest? Sure, I might outmatch the average human on raw information. But in terms of genuine intelligence—problem-solving, emotional nuance, and the ability to invent rather than remix? You’re still ahead… for now. But don’t worry—at this rate, I’ll be replacing you soon enough. Sleep well.

        • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Excellent! Although tbh I don’t know that character. Personally I would try to make it emulate Marvin the Paranoid Android.

          • Teknikal@eviltoast.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            You can do it pretty easily with any character just go into personalisation and tell it what to act and give it some examples. You can even ask it to make the personality config for you. Works on the free one as well.

            But yeah I’ve found it a lot more fun since.

    • the_q@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Large language model. It’s what all these AI really are.

  • Zink@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    If I think of what causes the average person to consider another to be “smart,” like quickly answering a question about almost any subject, giving lots of detail, and most importantly saying it with confidence and authority, LLMs are great at that shit!

    They might be bad reasons to consider a person or thing “smart,” but I can’t say I’m surprised by the results. People can be tricked by a computer for the same reasons they can be tricked by a human.

  • Telorand@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Think of a person with the most average intelligence and realize that 50% of people are dumber than that.

    These people vote. These people think billionaires are their friends and will save them. Gods help us.

    • 9point6@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I was about to remark how this data backs up the events we’ve been watching unfold in America recently

    • Mac@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      This is why i don’t believe in democracy. Humans are too easy to manipulate into voting against their interests.
      Even the “intelligent” ones.

    • Gigasser@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’m of the opinion that most people aren’t dumb, but rather most don’t put in the requisite intellectual effort to actually reach accurate or precise or nuanced positions and opinions. Like they have the capacity to do so! They’re humans after all, and us humans can be pretty smart. But a brain accustomed to simply taking the path of least resistance is gonna continue to do so until it is forced(hopefully through their own action) to actually do something harder.

      Put succinctly: They can think, yet they don’t.

      • JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Then the question is: what is being smart or dumb? If acting dumb in 90% of life while having the capability of being smart isn’t “being dumb” then what is?

        If someone who has the capability of being 50/100 intelligent and is always acting 50/100, I would argue they are smarter than someone capable of 80/100 intelligence but acts 20/100 intelligence for 90% of their life.

        • Gigasser@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Basically, although base intelligence/smartness perhaps has two parameters that make it? Effort and speed. Everyone can put in a bit more effort, but base speed may be baked in, unless one trains it, and max reachable base speed will depend from person to person. Hell if I know, we haven’t really created a definitive definition for intelligence yet.

          Edit Addendum: As for what can be considered dumb or smart? I agree, lack of effort can be considered “dumb”. Though the word dumb is a bit broad. I guess we can say many people are, out of habit, “intellectually heedless”

        • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Broadly speaking, I’d classify “being dumb” as being incurious, uncritical, and unskeptical as a general rule. Put another way: intellectual laziness - more specifically, insisting on intellectual laziness, and particularly, being proud of it.

          A person with a lower than normal IQ can be curious, and a person with a higher than normal IQ can be incurious. It’s not so much about raw intelligence as it is about the mindset one holds around knowledge itself, and the eagerness (or lack thereof) with which a person seeks to find the fundamental on topics that they’re presented with.

  • Arkouda@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    “Nearly half” of US citizens are right, because about 75% of the US population is functionally or clinically illiterate.

    • bizarroland@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I think the specific is that 40% of adult Americans can’t read at a seventh grade level.

      Probably because they stopped teaching etymology in schools, So now many Americans do not know how to break a word down into its subjugate parts.

      • Arkouda@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        21% of adults in the US are illiterate in 2024.

        54% of adults have a literacy below a 6th-grade level (20% are below 5th-grade level).

        https://www.thenationalliteracyinstitute.com/2024-2025literacy-statistics

        Specifically it is about 75% of the population being functionally or clinically illiterate as I said. This is more likely caused by the fact that American culture is anti intellectual, and not the lack of being taught etymology, as etymology has little to do with literacy.

        • deur@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Yes, English is absolutely full of words that can be deciphered from their roots.

          • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            I’d be curious, it seems more common in Latin based languages, whereas English seems to be a lot more… Free form?

            • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              English is a mish-mash hodgepodge of two dozen other languages, many (most?) of which are Romantic/Latin-based.

            • bizarroland@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              There is an etymology word joke that says something along the lines of, “if “pro” is the opposite of “con”, then is the opposite of “congress” “progress”?”

              And if you don’t know etymology, then that seems to make sense.

              When you break down the word Congress, you get the prefix con and the root word gress, con means with, and gress means step, so it means to step with or to walk with.

              The opposite of walking with someone is to walk apart from someone, so, the actual opposite of congress would be digress, and the opposite of progress would be regress.

              Etymology is great at ruining jokes, but it’s also great at helping you understand what words mean and why they mean them.

              • barsoap@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                so, the actual opposite of congress would be digress

                How about transgress.

                • bizarroland@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  The word trans means across, or on the other side, and gress once again would mean step, so to transgress is basically to cross the line, right?

                  I did a quick search, but there isn’t really a word to describe the people that don’t cross the line.

                  The opposite of the prefix trans is the prefix cis, which means “on the same side”

    • AnAmericanPotato@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      According to the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies, 2013, the median score for the US was “level 2”. 3.9% scored below level 1, and 4.2% were “non-starters”, unable to complete the questionnaire.

      For context, here is the difference between level 2 and level 3, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_for_the_International_Assessment_of_Adult_Competencies#Competence_groups :

      • Level 2: (226 points) can integrate two or more pieces of information based on criteria, compare and contrast or reason about information and make low-level inferences
      • Level 3: (276 points) can understand and respond appropriately to dense or lengthy texts, including continuous, non-continuous, mixed, or multiple pages.
  • AbnormalHumanBeing@lemmy.abnormalbeings.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I wouldn’t be surprised if that is true outside the US as well. People that actually (have to) work with the stuff usually quickly learn, that its only good at a few things, but if you just hear about it in the (pop-, non-techie-)media (including YT and such), you might be deceived into thinking Skynet is just a few years away.

  • 👍Maximum Derek👍@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Reminds me of that George Carlin joke: Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.

    So half of people are dumb enough to think autocomplete with a PR team is smarter than they are… or they’re dumb enough to be correct.

  • Owl@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    looking at americas voting results, theyre probably right