Post #2248223
2026-03-29 13:22 UTC
Replies (2)
-
@jneen@unstable.systems 2026-03-29 13:23
@arclight@oldbytes.space to your other question, part of the reason there's ambiguity on this is that LLMs can *claim* to provide references and introspect about its output, but that introspection and those references are still just... output
-
@arclight@oldbytes.space 2026-03-29 16:05
@jneen@unstable.systems I get extra twitchy about chatbot use because my job is software QA on nuclear safety analysis code (here's a decent technical basis for an earlier related code https://www.osti.gov/biblio/10200672/) We have enough problems with coarse models and missing or uncertain data, we don't need a machine confidently fabricating nonsense. I'm not going in front of a regulator to explain our answers are bullshit because someone trusted a chatbot to fill in the blanks. Health & safety of the people comes first, then environmental protection, then protection of equipment. It's simply unethical to use these systems in any part of the safety analysis or design or licensing process. There's too much at stake.