If an LLM can’t be trusted with a fast food order, I can’t imagine what it is reliable enough for. I really was expecting this was the easy use case for the things.

It sounds like most orders still worked, so I guess we’ll see if other chains come to the same conclusion.

  • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 days ago

    Capping waters fixes that one specific issue but not the problem.

    A suspicious order isn’t easy to define and no person who has ever participated in software development would underestimate the infinite ways a User can break software.

    • Link@rentadrunk.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      Surely if the person making the order sees 18,000 waters they would think, hold on this doesn’t seem right maybe I should ask the customer if they really want 18,000 waters?

      The same applies for the ice cream with bacon on it which was mentioned in the article. I believe a lot of these could be resolved with a bit of common sense.

      • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        The same applies for the ice cream with bacon on it

        Have you never seen what Americans eat? Bacon Creaminators are excellent.

      • Evkob (they/them)@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        If you think bacon on ice cream is weird enough to cancel an order, I can only imagine you’ve never worked a customer service job.

      • Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        Sure, but how do you distill this into a rule a computer can follow? “Suspicious” is not an objectively measurable thing that a program can just check against

        • TheRagingGeek@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          Think the easiest way would be to collect order data for at least a good number of months if not a couple years and feed it in and use that as a baseline of what a typical human order looks like, anything that deviates too far from that baseline needs to be handled by a human until someone can validate it as a good order, though I imagine you could get false positives for new menu items unless you set a reasonable instruction for items that have never appeared in the dataset before.

      • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        Sure, in the most extreme cases it would be obvious to the crew. But simply making mistakes at a higher rate than humans will result in a lot of unhappy customers.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        The same applies for the ice cream with bacon on it

        Does it, though? Unlike the 18,000 waters, if I were working a drive through I wouldn’t even blink at an order for bacon ice cream. Heck, I might make a little extra to try it for myself!

    • Communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      there is an incredibly finite number of ways to mess with this, they just need a button to send a report to the engineers with how they got messed with and eventually they’ll have a complete list. I really doubt it’d take long to iron out the vast majority of ways that can be thought of.

      • leftzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 days ago

        A QA engineer walks into a bar and orders a beer.

        She orders 2 beers.

        She orders 0 beers.

        She orders -1 beers.

        She orders a lizard.

        She orders a NULLPTR.

        She tries to leave without paying.

        Satisfied, she declares the bar ready for business. The first customer comes in an orders a beer. They finish their drink, and then ask where the bathroom is.

        The bar explodes.

          • hark@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 days ago

            I don’t know how you can think voice input is less versatile than text input, especially when a lot of voice input systems transform voice to text before processing. At least with text you get well-defined characters with a lot less variability.

              • hark@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 days ago

                Special characters is just one case to cover. If the user says they want “an elephant-sized drink” what does that mean to your system? At least that is relevant to size. Now imagine complete nonsense input like the joke you responded to (“-1 beers” or “a lizard”). SQL injection isn’t the only risk with handling inputs. The person who ordered 18,000 waters didn’t do a SQL injection attack.

                • Communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 days ago

                  none of those issues work because there is a whitelist of specific terms instead of a blacklist

                  -1 cannot be selected, a lizard isn’t on the list of inputs, and my point with the sql is that this isn’t a huge attack vector like an input field on a website, this is a dropdown list, essentially.

                  i challenge you to come up with one relevant attack that isn’t order too much of a thing or order conflicting modifications (note of course the modifications are also essentially read from a dropdown list)

                  everyone here seems to believe that the input field paradigm is not solveable when the inputs are fixed, that isn’t true.