@simon this isn't the whole story.
Some types of fact checking are hard. But ChatGPT's results include things such as made up URLs and citations.
It is much easier to establish the *provenance* of isolated facts like this, than to establish the accuracy of much wider statements.
Further, checking that accuracy has correctly been established is not much easier than establishing accuracy in the first place. Validating provenance claims are correct is even easier than making them correct.
@PrincexOfCups yeah, training it NOT to invent citations and URLs does feel to me like it should be an easier problem - I would hope that techniques along the lines of RLHF should be able to discourage it from doing that
@simon perhaps a LLM which still makes stuff up wildly but which always has accurate citations to back its claims is just too much of an infohazard?
@PrincexOfCups I've caught both Bing and Bard using cited data but also still slipping in a hallucination among the facts
