alt Hacker NewsWhy did NYC release it in the first place? Did they not QA it?
Or was it perhaps one of those cases where they found issues, but the only way to really know for sure that the deleterious impact is significant enough by pushing it to prod?
Replies
Remember that many people are heavily are happy-path biased. They see a good result once and say "that's it, ship it!"
I'm sure they QA'd it, but QA was probably "does this give me good results" (almost certainly 'yes' with an LLM), not "does this consistently not give me bad results".
> Why did NYC release it in the first place? Did they not QA it?
Considering Louis Rossmann's videos on his adventures with NYC bureaucracy (e.g. [0]), the QAers might not have known the laws any better than the chat bot.
QA efforts can whack-a-mole some issues, but the mismatch of problem and solution is inherent in any situation in which a generator of plausible-sounding text gets pointed at an area where correctness matters.
The chatbot was released under the Eric Adams administration. The same Eric Adams, as soon as his term finished, went to Dubai and launched a cryptocurrency.
https://apnews.com/article/eric-adams-crypto-meme-coin-942ba...
I think he is simply not very bright, and got mesmerized by all the shiny promises AI and crypto makes without the slightest understanding of how it actually works. I do not understand how he got into office in the first place.
> Why did NYC release it in the first place?
Perhaps a big fat check was involved.
Have you heard of Eric Adams?
Why do you think OpenAI let a red team loose on GPT-5 for six months before releasing it to the public?
>Why did NYC release it in the first place? Did they not QA it?
How do you QA black box non-deterministic system? I'm not being facetious, seriously asking.
EDIT: Formatting