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

Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

atomic14.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 307 posts

Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

#91

Post by FerociousTimes »

sandgiant wrote: post #79
kristiandupont wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's almost more astonishing to me to see reactions like yours. I showed it to a friend and she too was unimpressed because it gave answers in her field (finance) that were "good, but sortof basic". So we have here a chat bot that pretty much passes for a human and some people react with "meh, it's not a genius". It makes me think of Tim Urbans chart: https://imgs.search.brave.com/YR7qt28AjhAeXSr_qvSmJubqIKJW5S...

It's even more astonishing (depressing?) to me how little credit people give humans these days. If the consensus is that ChatGPT pretty much passes for a human, my definition of a human is very different from that of the consensus. At the very least I'd like my humans to exhibit even minimal capacity for emotional expression as well as consistency and honesty. I can't even believe I'm even spelling this out. What is…

From an intellectual standpoint, the bot is impressive and this is coming from an AI skeptic BTW.

I get your perspective that a reductionist view of humans as solely intellectual agents is severely lacking, and bordering on dehumanizing if taken to an extreme but it still doesn't take credit away from the impressive capabilities that this bot exhibits.

Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

#92

Post by SuoDuanDao »

codingdave wrote: post #27

I could have said this on any ChatGPT post the last few days, but I'm simply not seeing the accuracy of it in such a way that anything is threatened. ChatGPT is a plausible idiot. It gets just enough right, saying just enough words, to sound plausible and authoritative to anyone who doesn't know the subject matter well. But it also gets enough wrong that you cannot rely on its accuracy, and if it is talking about a s…

If the post-truth era has taught us anything, it's that humans aren't all that good at this either. It's probably a consequence of how logic works - to be reliable, you need a narrow field, the more open-ended the application the more likely it is to need to guess.

Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

#93

Post by bigDinosaur »

exodust wrote: post #50

Is the only way to check this out to hand over my mobile number to a website I know nothing about, and who took my email and name before telling me of the phone requirement? Dodgy. I'm surprised so many here have jumped in. "Sign up with email"... "ok, now verify email"... "SURPRISE! we won't let you in until you give us your mobile number".

Charitably it's one of the more effective ways at reducing abuse of the service (at least by normal people).

Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

#94

Post by spaniard89277 »

brushfoot wrote: post #39
risyachka wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has value only if you know what it is talking about, thus it can only assist. If you ask it about AWS - you need to already know AWS, same with business etc. And if you can't make your own elevator pitch - the odds that you will be able to run a successful company are little to none. Website builders and ready-to-use templates have been around for decades and they only increased the demand for devs. Even if GPT wi…

To add to this - GPT is good at synthesizing existing information, but it's bad at combining it in truly novel ways. OP's startup idea is in a well-understood domain. There are lots of existing competitors offering basically that exact service. There are clear, obvious paths to building it. GPT can draw from blog posts and tutorials. On the other hand, it does poorly with significantly novel ideas. I tried it with on…

This is my experience too. I've tried to do simple task like building small JS scripts and while it's doable, is like having a kid who needs oversight and can't clearly connect ideas.

And coding is supposedly an area where it shines.

GPT is waaay better than us humans at finding and summarizing information. Way way faster. But I've tried to write a blog post about some technical stuff and I finally gave up after many tries.

It's good. It's frightening already. But it's still not "there". It's like having a extremely fast but bit dumb virtual assistant.

Way better than anything we had before.

Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

#95

Post by alchemist1e9 »

chrisbaker98 wrote: post #70
gsatic wrote: post #33

The only people whose minds this is "blowing" are people who have never had to build or maintain question answering systems. ChatGPT is like having a bunch of 8 year olds who know how to use Google hanging around. Sure you can use them, and their skills might surprise u every now and then, but that has nothing to do with how much time you are going to waste on the answers they will get wrong.

> ChatGPT is like having a bunch of 8 year olds who know how to use Google hanging around. It astonishes me that people can dismiss ChatGPT like this. By your own account, there now exists an AI that can convincingly imitate a literate, technically fluent human child. That's an incredible advance that's far beyond anything that existed even a couple of years ago. How is it not amazing? I get the sense that if some of…

Exactly which makes me think the egos are perhaps bruised. Yes obviously it will be wrong but using it you keep that in mind.

To expand on the analogy it is like having an 8 year old around but unbelievably this 8 year old has literally read and remembered and basically “understood” everything about everything we collectively know.

I’ve tested it with fairly esoteric questions about the technologies I work with and it gives excellent results for an 8 year old and extremely quickly about anything.

I think it can significantly speedup technical work. I intent to try and have it help me this week and see how it goes.

Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

#96

Post by [deleted] »

indigochill wrote: post #82
kristiandupont wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's almost more astonishing to me to see reactions like yours. I showed it to a friend and she too was unimpressed because it gave answers in her field (finance) that were "good, but sortof basic". So we have here a chat bot that pretty much passes for a human and some people react with "meh, it's not a genius". It makes me think of Tim Urbans chart: https://imgs.search.brave.com/YR7qt28AjhAeXSr_qvSmJubqIKJW5S...

I like GPT-3 a lot, but there's an important distinction between "plausible conversation" and "trustworthy answers". ChatGPT is probably best in the world in the "plausible conversation" category. But you might say ChatGPT is like talking to a human who actually knows nothing about finance but doesn't let that stop them (and for that matter, if you wanted to anthropomorphize it, you could say part of the problem is C…

[deleted]

Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

#97

Post by rightbyte »

ben_w wrote: post #75
rightbyte wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is terrible. Spam will be terrible. The internet infrastructure for interperson communication will be dead as it works today. You will never know of you write to e.g. a sales rep or a bot if the conversation is shallow. Support call centers will be decimated to bot chats. Thankfully the bot does not speak my language so I can watch the shitshow from the other side the fence.

> Support call centers will be decimated to bot chats. Call centres were already heavily scripted even before speech recognition allowed human workers to be replaced with voice interfaces. And that’s ignoring whatever this is called: “Welcome to your $phone_company account. Press one to hear your messages, press two to hear your credit or top up, press three for…”

Ye I know. Those filters are infuriating. Especially if you need someone to take some action.

Some custom helpdesk ChatGPT trained on whatever too will probably multiplicatly be able to turn away 90% of the queries today's voice recognition BS can't handle making it even harder to reach the actual call centre. (Note that I write "turn away" not solve).

Call centre employees are in for a bad payday. They are probably the first to fall?

Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

#98

Post by alchemist1e9 »

urthor wrote: post #23
notart666 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really can't and it doesn't really work the way you think it does which is ironic that you'd think people on this site would be informed but I guess ycombinator has a financial conflict of interest in doing so. I wouldn't be surprised if they make posts on this topic with a very heavy bias like they do for a lot of their own investments. I remember being shown this software almost a decade ago in dealing with chat…

While it's never going to replace the man behind the machine. It still seems highly likely that "stitching libraries together" development workflows in 10-15 years will involve large amounts of copy-editing the output of large language models. The trajectory of improvements, from GitHub Copilot to ChatGPT, is too steep.

10-15 years? I think you mean next year!

Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

#99

Post by mdrzn »

exodust wrote: post #50

Is the only way to check this out to hand over my mobile number to a website I know nothing about, and who took my email and name before telling me of the phone requirement? Dodgy. I'm surprised so many here have jumped in. "Sign up with email"... "ok, now verify email"... "SURPRISE! we won't let you in until you give us your mobile number".

It's because of the $18 free credit they give out. You can still use those websites which rent out phone numbers for phone verifications, if you care about privacy.
Post reply on HN