[bjconlan]

I do love the warnings here... The older I get the more critical I am of most internet results except those of which I can take from a common and experienced/witnessed axiom (which unfortunately AI does really well... At least entrusting me to said point). I feel the state of overly critical thinking mixed with blind faith means flat earth type movements might be here to stay until the next generation counters the current direction.

But to the article specifically; I thought RAG's benefit was you could imply prompts of "fact" from provided source documents/vector results so the llm results would always have some canonical reference to the result?

[kendallgclark]

That might be RAG’s benefit if LLMs were more steerable but they can be stubborn.

[ricksunny]

While I’m receptive to the fact that RAGs have performance limitations, and that graph database-based solutions may avoid hallucinations, wouldn’t your rhetorical position be best served by offering a trial portal for users to upload their own document corpora and see for themselves that prompts to Stardog never result in hallucinations? Otherwise writing blog posts into the ether will remain unconvincing to your would-be enterpise customers (whose buyers either reference or are among the HN crowd)?

[mortsnort]

Kendall the blog link at the end for semantic parsing gives a 404 error.