Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Building an interpreter for my programming language with ChatGPT

6502.is-a.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 141 posts

Re: Building an interpreter for my programming language with ChatGPT

#41

Post by throwaway09223 »

tazjin wrote: post #30
dunefox wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, it's exactly like Google search but more interactive?

Google doesn't hallucinate completely fictitious results. It will however index hallucinated results generated with GPT and published somewhere, so once we're at that point it really doesn't matter anymore.

Google search absolutely does hallucinate completely fictitious results. It's called SEO spam.

Google just gives you associations provided by random other people on the internet. It's largely garbage, most often deliberately disingenuous (to make you look at an ad). Ad revenue models for the internet encourage the generation of this type of false material.

A better criticism would be that the same thing will happen to something like chatgpt -- and the question is whether the model for analysis can better handle it at scale.

Re: Building an interpreter for my programming language with ChatGPT

#42

Post by eligro91 »

grashalm wrote: post #6
habibur wrote: post #5

ChatGPT will be the google killer, if they can scale it up for unregistered general use. No idea how much openai's computational cost is per query. Unless it's an order of magnitude higher than google's, we can assume the next thing after yahoo -> altavista -> google is here.

For ChatGPT to be the Google killer they need to provide source URLs.

the problem is ads. there will always be people who will try to promote their results, and it will somehow arrive to ChatGPT. there will be chatGPT SEO, people will try to promote their answers so that ChatGPT will chose these answers. Think of "what's the best pizza in NY" - SEO would pollute the web with hundreds of different articles which places Pizza Foo as #1, and those articles probably be scanned by OpenGPT. The good part here is that you might be able to optimize your query like "what's the best pizza in NY, based on /r/pizza subreddit? exclude bots (based on their karma reputation)"

Re: Building an interpreter for my programming language with ChatGPT

#43

Post by jonathanstrange »

tazjin wrote: post #30
dunefox wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, it's exactly like Google search but more interactive?

Google doesn't hallucinate completely fictitious results. It will however index hallucinated results generated with GPT and published somewhere, so once we're at that point it really doesn't matter anymore.

It kind of does in case of their new Questions & Answers feature. They often give wrong or nonsensical answers to queries. To be fair, it doesn't hallucinate the results but offers little snippets from the web that answer something else than what was asked.

Re: Building an interpreter for my programming language with ChatGPT

#44

Post by japanman425 »

japanman425 wrote: post #40

A poem using only git commands (it did try to cat this to a file at first) Git clone, my heart will follow Git add, let’s make this love last Git commit, I’ll always be true Git push, let’s make this official Git branch, let’s take this to the next level Git merge, our love will grow stronger Git checkout, let’s explore new adventures Git stash, let’s keep our secrets safe Git pull, let’s stay connected Git status, o…

  I use my computer, and type in a command
  I press enter, and watch it expand
  
  ls will list all the files, in a directory
  cd will change the directory, with flexibility
  
  touch will create a new file, with a simple name
  rm will delete it, with no one to blame

  mv will move it, to a new location
  cp will copy it, for duplication
  
  chmod will change the permissions, for security
  grep will search for a pattern, with ease and agility
  
  These are just a few, of the many commands
  That I use everyday, with my computer in hand.

Re: Building an interpreter for my programming language with ChatGPT

#45

Post by davrosthedalek »

mudrockbestgirl wrote: post #9
habibur wrote: post #5

ChatGPT will be the google killer, if they can scale it up for unregistered general use. No idea how much openai's computational cost is per query. Unless it's an order of magnitude higher than google's, we can assume the next thing after yahoo -> altavista -> google is here.

The problem is that you cannot trust the output. It's often wrong, but in subtle nonobvious ways. For precise information you still need to check the sources to make sure what you're getting is correct. You can test it out with a (not-so-mainstream) topic that you're an expert in. You'll see lots of mistakes that are obvious to you, but wouldn't be obvious to non-experts. But it's an incredible tool for brainstorming…

What's fascinating to me is that you can often point out the error, and it will correct them.

Re: Building an interpreter for my programming language with ChatGPT

#46

Post by twoodfin »

schmorptron wrote: post #7
grashalm wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For ChatGPT to be the Google killer they need to provide source URLs.

It looks like it has web browsing support built-in in some form, but it's disabled at the moment. That said, I'm skeptical that it'd be able to "disrupt" google, as the track record of things that are said to do that is quite bad. On the other hand, google seems to be heading in the same direction with projects such as Lamda. In a roundabout way, this might just end up being the quick answer box at the top of search…

I don’t think it actually can browse the web. It’s obviously been trained with an extensive web-sourced corpus.

It seems that the developers have placed guardrails around web-search-like queries not because ChatGPT can’t answer them, but because they want to discourage using it that way for—I’d guess because they want to direct usage towards the conversational / contextual aspects they’re trying to improve.

Re: Building an interpreter for my programming language with ChatGPT

#47

Post by jonathanstrange »

habibur wrote: post #28
babuskov wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ChatGPT will be the google killer This was my prompt: What's the relative distance between Sun and its planets compared to the size of Sun? ChatGPT answer: > The average distance between the Sun and its planets is approximately 5% of the Sun's diameter. If you run into bunch of such answers, you will soon stop trusting it for anything. As for Google - it doesn't even try to answer the question. But no answer is oft…

Google, Wikipedia, and historically the internet had been unreliable for many of the queries. More so in the beginning. But over time most of the errors are ironed out. ChatGPT is a very promising start I would say. In the end convenience wins out at cost of correctness. The proportion matters, convenience::correctness.

How so? Anyone who sincerely asks a question wants the answer to be 100% correct, or the person answering to make it clear that they have a low confidence or don't really know. If the answer is false but stated with certainty, it is not only useless, it can even be worse than useless. There are other quality dimensions for answers, of course, such as the right level of detail and comprehensibility for the person asking, but these are all useless if the answer is false in the first place.

Re: Building an interpreter for my programming language with ChatGPT

#48

Post by qayxc »

olooney wrote: post #34
FranchuFranchu wrote: post #32

I tried to make ChatGPT solve IMO-type math problems. However, its reasoning is almost always flawed. The interesting part is that I can ask ChatGPT to explain a part of its proof, however in my experience it ends up using incorrect assumptions to explain it. (for example, "You are right that 1 is an odd number. However, 1 is not an odd number so it works to solve the problem")

Yeah. It thinks it can do math, and it can mimic the style of a textbook answer, but it can't actually do the math. Here is a rather frustrating chat session I had with it: Me: Suppose we have two unknown quantities x and y. If three time x plus two times y is twenty, and 2 times x plus three time y is ten, what are x and y? ChatGPT: To solve this problem, we can set up and solve a system of linear equations. The fir…

The problem is that the LLM is just that - a language model. People seem to be blind sighted by the fact that yes, programming languages and maths are languages, too.

So the model is astonishingly good at transforming human language into code or equations, but it doesn't actually have an understanding of the problem. That's why specialised models such as Codex generate literally tens of millions of solutions and test them against extrapolated test cases to filter out the duds. ChatGPT doesn't do that.

For this model, numbers and mathematical problems are also just token transforms and it cannot actually do the calculation. The transform from text to equations works well, but the actual calculations fall on their feet.

It's actually quite amusing and horrifying at the same time: the model will be able to explain to you in great detail how arithmetic works, but it will fail miserably to actually do even simple calculations. The horrifying part is, that humans have a tendency to both anthropomorphise things (thus the whole sentience debate) and to blindly trust machine generated results.

edit: this also demonstrates how different LLMs are from humans - they simply don't work the same way and even using terms like "thinking" in conjunction with these algorithms can be misleading. Maybe we need new terminology when talking about what these systems do.

Re: Building an interpreter for my programming language with ChatGPT

#49

Post by tazjin »

throwaway09223 wrote: post #41
tazjin wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google doesn't hallucinate completely fictitious results. It will however index hallucinated results generated with GPT and published somewhere, so once we're at that point it really doesn't matter anymore.

Google search absolutely does hallucinate completely fictitious results. It's called SEO spam. Google just gives you associations provided by random other people on the internet. It's largely garbage, most often deliberately disingenuous (to make you look at an ad). Ad revenue models for the internet encourage the generation of this type of false material. A better criticism would be that the same thing will happen t…

> Google search absolutely does hallucinate completely fictitious results

No, it absolutely does not. Yes, there is SEO spam in the index, but no - it is not Google hallucating it. It really exists on the internet, see also the second point of my comment.

> the same thing will happen to something like chatgpt

This isn't something that "happens to" GPT, GPT is doing it. There's probably even already GPT -> SEO spam pipelines out there generating websites.

Re: Building an interpreter for my programming language with ChatGPT

#50

Post by qayxc »

throwaway09223 wrote: post #41
tazjin wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google doesn't hallucinate completely fictitious results. It will however index hallucinated results generated with GPT and published somewhere, so once we're at that point it really doesn't matter anymore.

Google search absolutely does hallucinate completely fictitious results. It's called SEO spam. Google just gives you associations provided by random other people on the internet. It's largely garbage, most often deliberately disingenuous (to make you look at an ad). Ad revenue models for the internet encourage the generation of this type of false material. A better criticism would be that the same thing will happen t…

> Google search absolutely does hallucinate completely fictitious results. It's called SEO spam.

I wouldn't categorise that as "hallucinating fictitious results" - the algorithms still only returns existing results. If you follow the link, you will find key words embedded in the HTML or visible text in the browser.

Different kettle of fish entirely.

Post reply on HN