261–270 of 444 posts
I can't tell what is worse now: the sycophantic ChatGPT hype guys/gals who write articles "it's coming for all of our jerbs!", or articles like this one that deliberately misuse ChatGPT and then say "it's overhyped". They're both missing the point. Yes, ChatGPT can be tricked, confidently give wrong answers, but it is still ludicrously useful. It is basically like having an incredibly smart engineer/scientists/philos…
I can't tell what is worse now: the sycophantic ChatGPT hype guys/gals who write articles "it's coming for all of our jerbs!", or articles like this one that deliberately misuse ChatGPT and then say "it's overhyped". They're both missing the point. Yes, ChatGPT can be tricked, confidently give wrong answers, but it is still ludicrously useful. It is basically like having an incredibly smart engineer/scientists/philos…
I can't tell what is worse now: the sycophantic ChatGPT hype guys/gals who write articles "it's coming for all of our jerbs!", or articles like this one that deliberately misuse ChatGPT and then say "it's overhyped". They're both missing the point. Yes, ChatGPT can be tricked, confidently give wrong answers, but it is still ludicrously useful. It is basically like having an incredibly smart engineer/scientists/philos…
I had a detailed conversion with chatGPT about how to gracefully handle terminating conditions of a rust program. It summarized cogently to register at_exit()’s for each thread, panic handlers, and register signal handlers. It advised and explain in detail on my query about the thread handling for each of these variants, gave really helpful advice on collecting join handles in a closure on the main thread and waiting…
I have the same experience with it, it's very useful, especially when you are unsure about what to even look for. I have a few theories I suspect it's just a bias we have, most people aren't doing or creating anything, they aren't solving problems or learning new things constantly like engineers do, so chatgpt feels useless to them. Or perhaps the problems we want to talk or learn about are just easier for an ai to a…
Maybe because either they believe that ChatGPT is worthless, or they have to deal with the fact that their knowledge is becoming worthless (or, at least, worth less).
I had a detailed conversion with chatGPT about how to gracefully handle terminating conditions of a rust program. It summarized cogently to register at_exit()’s for each thread, panic handlers, and register signal handlers. It advised and explain in detail on my query about the thread handling for each of these variants, gave really helpful advice on collecting join handles in a closure on the main thread and waiting…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you happened to get information from it that turned out to be ok, you were lucky. This is just saying that sometimes ChatGPT is right and sometimes it's wrong, with an implicit stance on the relative frequencies. In my own experience it would be more accurate to say you're unlucky if it gets it wrong—but then much of this hinges on having a good sense of what it's going to be good at / useful for. (The other thi…
> This is just saying that sometimes ChatGPT is right and sometimes it's wrong No, it's saying that ChatGPT is not reliable. It's not reliable because getting things right or wrong is not part of its design at all. All it does is generate text that matches a pattern. There is nothing anywhere in it that filters or evaluates text based on any semantic connection with anything else.
That's another way of saying sometimes it is right and sometimes it is wrong...
> All it does is generate text that matches a pattern
This is about as meaningful as saying, "all things are is collections of atoms".
We are barely beginning to explore the implications of these pattern-extending structures: their most interesting features emerge from their structure, cannot be simply derived from the fact that they do pattern continuation in the same way you're not gonna derive the concept of friendship from analyzing chemical bond structure.
I had a detailed conversion with chatGPT about how to gracefully handle terminating conditions of a rust program. It summarized cogently to register at_exit()’s for each thread, panic handlers, and register signal handlers. It advised and explain in detail on my query about the thread handling for each of these variants, gave really helpful advice on collecting join handles in a closure on the main thread and waiting…
I had a detailed conversion with chatGPT about how to gracefully handle terminating conditions of a rust program. It summarized cogently to register at_exit()’s for each thread, panic handlers, and register signal handlers. It advised and explain in detail on my query about the thread handling for each of these variants, gave really helpful advice on collecting join handles in a closure on the main thread and waiting…
I already did before I read this part.
The way I've come to look at ChatGPT is via a D&D analogy. It's like a helpful Bard with 1 rank in all the knowledge skills and a good bluff roll. It'll give you good answers to a lot of basic queries, but if it doesn't know, it'll just make up something and provide that. Once you know that, I think it can be a lot of use and in many way, I think it'll get a lot better with time. I've already found it useful in basic…
Turns out he's just had four pints and is very good at talking.
I can't tell what is worse now: the sycophantic ChatGPT hype guys/gals who write articles "it's coming for all of our jerbs!", or articles like this one that deliberately misuse ChatGPT and then say "it's overhyped". They're both missing the point. Yes, ChatGPT can be tricked, confidently give wrong answers, but it is still ludicrously useful. It is basically like having an incredibly smart engineer/scientists/philos…
> It is basically like having an incredibly smart engineer/scientists/philosopher/etc that can explain things quite well, but for pretty much every field. No it can not explain anything. It's a (stochastic) parrot, nothing more. > Yep, but it is such an incredibly useful tool It is not. You are fooling yourself. You are building a castle on a swamp.
It's just a tool. You don't use a shovel to rake leaves, but that doesn't make a shovel any less useful.