HackerTrans
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

mattbit

no profile record

Submissions

Confidence Sets, Confidence Intervals

bactra.org
1 points·by mattbit·letzten Monat·0 comments

Ear Training Practice

tonedear.com
332 points·by mattbit·letzten Monat·128 comments

Recommended Mystery Novels

bactra.org
4 points·by mattbit·letzten Monat·0 comments

StereoTales: Multilingual Open-Ended Stereotype Discovery in LLMs

research.giskard.ai
2 points·by mattbit·letzten Monat·1 comments

OpenClaw security vulnerabilities include data leakage, prompt injection risks

giskard.ai
2 points·by mattbit·vor 5 Monaten·1 comments

Redis LangCache

redis.io
3 points·by mattbit·vor 9 Monaten·0 comments

NLP Models Think about Gender Stereotypes

opensamizdat.com
1 points·by mattbit·vor 2 Jahren·0 comments

OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications

llmtop10.com
2 points·by mattbit·vor 3 Jahren·0 comments

Don’t you (forget NLP): Prompt injection with control characters in ChatGPT

dropbox.tech
1 points·by mattbit·vor 3 Jahren·0 comments

Show HN: Python library to scan ML models for vulnerabilities

docs.giskard.ai
20 points·by mattbit·vor 3 Jahren·1 comments

comments

mattbit
·vor 3 Jahren·discuss
From my experience, in a majority of real-world LLMs applications, prompt injection is not a primary concern.

The systems that I see most commonly deployed in practice are chatbots that use retrieval-augmented generation. These chatbots are typically very constrained: they can't use the internet, they can't execute tools, and essentially just serve as an interface to non-confidential knowledge bases.

While abuse through prompt injection is possible, its impact is limited. Leaking the prompt is just uninteresting, and hijacking the system to freeload on the LLM could be a thing, but it's easily addressable by rate limiting or other relatively simple techniques.

In many cases, for a company is much more dangerous if their chatbot produces toxic/wrong/inappropriate answers. Think of an e-commerce chatbot that gives false information about refund conditions, or an educational bot that starts exposing children to violent content. These situations can be a hugely problematic from a legal and reputational standpoint.

The fact that some nerd, with some crafty and intricate prompts, intentionally manages to get some weird answer out of the LLM is almost always secondary with respect to the above issues.

However, I think the criticism is legitimate: one reason we are limited to such dumb applications of LLMs is precisely because we have not solved prompt injection, and deploying a more powerful LLM-based system would be too risky. Solving that issue could unlock a lot of the currently unexploited potential of LLMs.
mattbit
·vor 3 Jahren·discuss
This is how McIntosh & Della Sala put it:

> in the academic literature, it has been suggested that the signature pattern of the DKE (Figure 1A) might be nothing more than a statistical artefact. In a typical study, people’s tendencies to under- or overestimation are analysed as a function of their ability for the task. This involves a ‘double dipping’ into the data because the task performance score is used once to rank people for ability, and then again to determine whether the self-estimate is an under- or over-estimate. This dubious double-dipping makes the analysis prone to a slippery statistical phenomenon called ‘regression to the mean’.
mattbit
·vor 3 Jahren·discuss
This is not ‘autocorrelation’, it is regression to the mean. I find the article unclear and imprecise. For those interested in a better overview of the Dunning–Kruger effect, I recommend this short article by McIntosh & Della Sala instead:

https://www.bps.org.uk/psychologist/persistent-irony-dunning...
mattbit
·vor 3 Jahren·discuss
There’s actually two ways of seeing this: the three-domain system and the two-domain system.

The three-domain system divides life in Archaea, Bacteria, and Eukarya. In this system, Archaea and Bacteria can be grouped together as prokaryotes.

In the two-domain system, the division is between Archaea and Bacteria. In this case, eukaryotes are seen as a subgroup of Archaea.

Hope to have cleared up some of the confusion.
mattbit
·vor 3 Jahren·discuss
Hey, Giskard team member here! I am around to discuss and read your feedback.

I’ve worked in particular on automatic scanning of ML models for bugs and problems, the idea was to systematically scan for general issues and automatically find segments of data on which the model performs worse than average. If you have questions, I am happy to discuss here.