logoalt Hacker News

tpoacher10/02/20241 replyview on HN

Even LLM's can see through your silly tricks:

> Q: The question "Should you use Rust in LLM based tools for performance?" contains a fallacy. Could you tell me the name of that fallacy?

> A: A clever question!

> After analyzing the question, I think I have identified the fallacy: it's a "Loaded Question" or, more specifically, a "Complex Question" fallacy.

> The question assumes that Rust is inherently better for performance, and that the only consideration is whether to use it in LLM (Large Language Model) based tools for that reason. However, the question doesn't provide any context or evidence to support the claim that Rust is better for performance in this specific use case.

> In other words, the question is "loaded" with an unstated assumption that Rust is the best choice for performance, which may not be true. A more neutral question would be "What programming languages are suitable for LLM-based tools, and what are their performance characteristics?"

> Am I correct?

Yes you are, Mr Mixtral. Yes you are. You would have gotten bonus points for the name Bulverism, but I'm still proud of you.


Replies

tinco10/02/2024

> Q: The question "Should you use Rust in LLM based tools for performance?" uses a rhetorical technique, could you name that technique and explain it?

> A: The question "Should you use Rust in LLM based tools for performance?" employs a rhetorical technique known as a rhetorical question.

> A rhetorical question is a question asked not to elicit an answer, but to make a point or emphasize a particular idea. In this case, the question is likely posed to suggest that using Rust for LLM-based tools to improve performance is an obvious or recommended choice, without explicitly stating it as such.

> Rhetorical questions are effective because they:

> Engage the audience by prompting them to think about the answer > Implicitly convey the speaker's or writer's stance on a topic > Can be more persuasive than direct statements, as they encourage the audience to arrive at the intended conclusion themselves

> In this specific example, the rhetorical question implies that Rust is a good choice for performance in LLM-based tools without directly asserting it. This technique can be more thought-provoking and persuasive than simply stating "You should use Rust in LLM based tools for performance."

Thank you Mr Claude. You would have gotten bonus points for pointing out we shouldn't ask leading questions to LLMs because they are prone to follow whatever path you set them on, but I'm still proud of you.

show 1 reply