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

ChatGPT Cheat Sheet

drive.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 145 posts

Re: ChatGPT Cheat Sheet

#71

Post by simonw »

6keZbCECT2uB wrote: post #53
simonw wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a programmer, large language models let me solve an increasing range of problems that I couldn't have solved without them. So I think they are a very big deal. Just one example: parsing structured data out of a big pile of poorly formatted PDF documents. That used to be too difficult and expensive for me to tackle without a small army of data entry people to help do the work. Today I can point Textract OCR at it a…

I think that ChatGPT could be a big accelerator for creative activity, but I wouldn't trust any output that I've only partially verified. That limits it to human scale problems in its direct output, but there are many ways that human scale output like code snippets can be useful on computer scale data.

There are plenty of valuable use-cases that aren't at much risk from hallucinations at all:

- Asking it to summarize text

- Using it to extract facts from text and present them in an alternative format - turning a chunk of HTML into JSON for example

- Creative writing - poems, stories etc

- Getting feedback on your own text - asking it what should be tightened up, which bits are confusing and so on

- All kinds of code generation activities

Re: ChatGPT Cheat Sheet

#72

Post by gcanyon »

6keZbCECT2uB wrote: post #53
simonw wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a programmer, large language models let me solve an increasing range of problems that I couldn't have solved without them. So I think they are a very big deal. Just one example: parsing structured data out of a big pile of poorly formatted PDF documents. That used to be too difficult and expensive for me to tackle without a small army of data entry people to help do the work. Today I can point Textract OCR at it a…

I think that ChatGPT could be a big accelerator for creative activity, but I wouldn't trust any output that I've only partially verified. That limits it to human scale problems in its direct output, but there are many ways that human scale output like code snippets can be useful on computer scale data.

There's two classes of response: those that are factually "right" or "wrong" -- who was the sixteenth president of the U.S.? And those that are opinion/debatable: "How should I break up with my boyfriend?" People will focus on the facts, and those will be improved (viz: the melding of ChatGPT with Wolfram Alpha) but the opinion answers are going to be more readily acceptable (and harder to optimize?).

Re: ChatGPT Cheat Sheet

#73

Post by zeven7 »

slaymaker1907 wrote: post #68
scifibestfi wrote: post #9

I'm trying to understand how big of a deal ChatGPT and the like is or isn't. Even people in AI don't seem to agree on whether it's going to change everything or it's overhyped and not a major advancement. Which is it? Or somewhere in the middle? "if you think AI chatter has reached an annoying level right now you're in for something else. it's going to be the only thing on anybody's mind starting shortly... i'm findi…

ChatGPT made me rethink my assessment of how close we are to general AI. I was of the opinion that we need some major architectural innovations to actually get to general AI and while I think we still need some huge discoveries, I think ChatGPT was one of those milestones.

ChatGPT sounds really human, but really I think it's more of a pulling back of the curtain of what many people do a lot of the time: regurgitate ideas. People are capable of more intelligence, but a large part of human work, time, even creativity comes from taking everything you've sucked into your brain during your life and dumping out something else. ChatGPT is amazingly good at this part of mimicking a human.

Re: ChatGPT Cheat Sheet

#74

Post by aradox66 »

flir wrote: post #65

I can throw a couple more in: If you split the song generation and the chords ("write me a song in the style of Nick Cave"/"Can you suggest a chord progression for the Nick Cave song you wrote earlier?") I find you get a more complete explanation of the chords ("This progression uses mostly basic chords that are easy to play and allows for a lot of room for interpretation and personalization. The G to C progression i…

I have had zero success getting a guitar tab out of ChatGPT. Well, sometimes it'll write a short tab, but it will be total nonsense. Any suggestions?

Re: ChatGPT Cheat Sheet

#75

Post by iliane5 »

simonw wrote: post #44
TillE wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was the crass money-making part of it, but a lot of nerds earnestly believe(d) that cryptocurrencies would have massive world-changing consequences. I think it's increasingly obvious that there's little rational or empirical basis for such belief. With AI, the biggest claims I see are overwhelmingly from people who are not doing cutting-edge work in the field, who have no real foundation for a belief that these…

My personal excitement about language models is based on what they can do today. I'm a big believer in the "capability overhang" idea, which is that the existing language models still have a huge array of capabilities that we haven't discovered yet. That theory seems to be proved correct on a constant basis. Even the classic "let's think about this step by step" paper came out less than a year ago: https://arxiv.org/…

Couldn't agree more.

This paper (https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.07682) also touches on a pretty fascinating phenomenon - that when scaling up large language models they seem to "naturally" obtain new emergent abilities that do not exist on smaller models.

Re: ChatGPT Cheat Sheet

#76

Post by psychphysic »

gcanyon wrote: post #70
scifibestfi wrote: post #9

I'm trying to understand how big of a deal ChatGPT and the like is or isn't. Even people in AI don't seem to agree on whether it's going to change everything or it's overhyped and not a major advancement. Which is it? Or somewhere in the middle? "if you think AI chatter has reached an annoying level right now you're in for something else. it's going to be the only thing on anybody's mind starting shortly... i'm findi…

"strong AI is not within sight" What is in sight is AI that can (sometimes) fool us into thinking it is "strong". And whether it is or not becomes a point for philosophers to debate. We're heading toward a situation captured fairly well in "The Good Place" -- is Janet actually alive? Is killing her wrong? She would tell you no, as long as you're not approaching the button that actually reboots her :-)

What it's unequivocally done is shown us that while we thought bigger models would lead to incremental improvements we have had a giant leap with this X10 bigger model.

I.e. were not good at predicting how far away stronger AI is. Even if we can comment on strong/weak AI.

Re: ChatGPT Cheat Sheet

#77

Post by gcanyon »

michaelrpeskin wrote: post #17
scifibestfi wrote: post #9

I'm trying to understand how big of a deal ChatGPT and the like is or isn't. Even people in AI don't seem to agree on whether it's going to change everything or it's overhyped and not a major advancement. Which is it? Or somewhere in the middle? "if you think AI chatter has reached an annoying level right now you're in for something else. it's going to be the only thing on anybody's mind starting shortly... i'm findi…

I have been saying lately "if your job can be replaced by AI, it should". I know that sounds crass, but I'm a person who is always trying to replace my tasks with small shell scripts leaving only the real thinking to be the stuff that I do. I remember a long time ago Joel from Joel on Software made a post/comment (I can't find it, so it must have been a comment) about how the hard part of programming is interpreting…

"If you could have AI turn a spec into code, then the real intelligence goes into writing the spec to cover the complexity."

If that's the case, then the spec is code. And this isn't the first time something like that has happened: people who write assembly might say to someone writing Python, "How can you call that code when you don't even know which register is storing a value?"

Re: ChatGPT Cheat Sheet

#78

Post by highhedgehog »

little bit of a side question here, but. I've been wanting to try chatGPT for weeks and it seems it's always busy. Is this actually what it is? Or is there a place somewhere else where I can test it?
Post reply on HN