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

CheatGPT

blog.humphd.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 544 posts

Re: CheatGPT

#231

Post by dinkumthinkum »

BoorishBears wrote: post #154
josh2600 wrote: post #123

So most interview questions like "make a binary tree" are dead. The best interview question that will never die: "What's the weirdest bug you debugged? What made it weird?" For posterity: https://www.gamedeveloper.com/programming/my-hardest-bug-eve...

While I'm not complaining that people are realizing they're dead... why is ChatGPT the final straw for those ridiculous "make a binary tree" questions? Why wasn't it the fact that these questions became such a gameable system, that we started referring to them by the copyrighted name of a site where you can access nearly every permutation that will ever be asked of you, along with extremely detailed solutions with ra…

I mean if you can’t make a binary tree, what do you really know about programming? If ChatGPT is so great, why would even need a job interview, why not just eliminate the jobs altogether?

Re: CheatGPT

#232

Post by throw310822 »

kurisufag wrote: post #222
throw310822 wrote: post #209

I don't understand how most of the comments here seem to be along the lines of "these interview questions are useless now" or "we need to rethink education, it hasn't kept up". These all seem absurdly myopic to me. What we're seeing is the first instance, still very limited and imperfect, of AGI. This is not going to make some interview questions obsolete, or give students more tools to cheat with their homework. It…

>What we're seeing is the first instance, still very limited and imperfect, of AGI absolutely not. language-model text generation is actually about as non-general as it gets -- they are fundamentally incapable of understanding anything at all, ever. they can't do math, work through basic logic problems, or produce any output that isn't just an assumed logical continuation of the input.

I don't agree. Besides the fact that I can't do much math either, except with a lot of effort and tools, at this point there are masses of examples of GPTs doing basic reasoning and logic and solving problems. Of course you can say that they do it by "finding the most probable continuation"- and you're right. But that doesn't change the fact that it works. Simply because to find the most probable continuation ultimately you need semantic understanding, and somewhere, back-propagating from the training text, the NNs have managed to build a decent model of the world. There's no other way to explain their performance, these are not markov chain text generators.

Re: CheatGPT

#233

Post by marginalia_nu »

brucethemoose2 wrote: post #230
marginalia_nu wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there really a basis for such an assumption? Don't returns tend to diminish with effort, rather than increase?

But interest and investment is also increasing exponentially. I've never really seen anything like this before in AI land, even when GANs and such were doing amazing things.

We have seen this level of rapid development and massive hype in AI before. Several times, in fact. Check it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_winter

Re: CheatGPT

#234

Post by dinkumthinkum »

resource0x wrote: post #211
brycedriesenga wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can use this for that: https://huggingface.co/spaces/JavaFXpert/Chat-GPT-LangChain (GPT + WolframAlpha + Whisper)

I tested several AI chats, and none of them could correctly answer the question: "what is heavier, 1 kilogram of nails or 1 kilogram of feathers?". Does this one know? (I don't have openai key, can't test it myself). EDIT: turns out, the latest version of chatGPT knows the answer. They also fixed the answer to another famous trick question("The son of my father, but not my brother. Who is that?")

This sounds like heresy around here.

Re: CheatGPT

#235

Post by dinkumthinkum »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #78
novok wrote: post #53

The failure mode of things like ChatGPT is it can make wrong answers confidently, subtly, and if you don't have the skill to audit what is wrong with the answer, then it can be fairly catastrophic. So instead of making questions generative, you make them audits / debugging type ones. Use ChatGPT to generate a result after several iterations that is wrong and then ask them what is wrong with the result. Since ChatGPT…

I think it’s an interesting point about making the questions audit or debugging. But, also a mistake to hark on the often humorous fact at how confidently wrong our Gen1 AI can be. That will go down over time. Imagine a time when AI is making good programming choices and correcting itself when it’s wrong. Imagine Gen4 AIs. Both of these things tie together. If we need to detect cheating now, prove you can debug. When…

Why do you think this is generation? You think AI abs ML started this year or in your lifetime??

Re: CheatGPT

#236

Post by throwaway675309 »

modeless wrote: post #51
agrippanux wrote: post #37

What ChatGPT (and its cousins) expose is that the way humans have been taught in most schools - memorizing and regurgitating information - is now a commodity. What humans being to the table over ChatGPT is our ability to create new links between information, aka creativity. Teaching creativity, imo, will require a return to the methods like those of Sophocles and his contemporaries. I would rather this author be writ…

> What humans being to the table over ChatGPT is Statements like these are premature. ChatGPT is three months old! This is a rapidly advancing field. The capabilities of these models are very likely to be radically different five years from now. Any conclusions drawn now about what value is uniquely human and out of reach for AI may be proven wrong quickly.

Chat GPT is still at its heart GPT technology (with some clever embedding of the running transcript acting as a reoccurring prompt) which is several years old at this point.

Re: CheatGPT

#237

Post by Angostura »

josh2600 wrote: post #123

So most interview questions like "make a binary tree" are dead. The best interview question that will never die: "What's the weirdest bug you debugged? What made it weird?" For posterity: https://www.gamedeveloper.com/programming/my-hardest-bug-eve...

"it involved a program that ran perfectly fine during testing but crashed whenever it was deployed to the production environment. After much investigation, it was found that the bug was caused by a combination of the production environment's security settings and the program's use of random number generation.

The program used a random number generator to generate a unique ID for each user that logged in. However, the production environment had security settings that blocked certain types of random number generation for security reasons. This caused the program to crash whenever it tried to generate a unique ID for a user.

The solution to this weird bug was to modify the program to use a different random number generator that was allowed by the production environment's security settings. The lesson learned from this bug is to always be aware of the production environment's settings and limitations and to thoroughly test software in the target environment before deploying it."

Re: CheatGPT

#238

Post by jack_pp »

epicureanideal wrote: post #162
josh2600 wrote: post #123

So most interview questions like "make a binary tree" are dead. The best interview question that will never die: "What's the weirdest bug you debugged? What made it weird?" For posterity: https://www.gamedeveloper.com/programming/my-hardest-bug-eve...

> "What's the weirdest bug you debugged? What made it weird?" If you can remember, 5-10 years after you solved it.

Exactly, I've been programming for a long time, almost 13 years since I started working on complex software and that question just makes me draw a blank. There's been bugs in my career but none that have "traumatized" me or been all that complicated to get through. Maybe I just don't put that much emphasis on negative experiences. I don't remember losing poker hands all that accurately either, I just don't care.

Also if you've only ever worked in web dev or something easy like that are there even that many really "weird" bugs anymore? Maybe if you work on embedded or low level code bases with lots of race conditions.. those could qualify but if you're doing high level work.. that's rare

Re: CheatGPT

#239

Post by meindnoch »

enraged_camel wrote: post #181
meindnoch wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>So most interview questions like "make a binary tree" are dead. "Make a binary tree and explain it on this whiteboard"

ChatGPT also has decent explanations tbh.

on this whiteboard *points to physical whiteboard on the wall*

Re: CheatGPT

#240

Post by permo-w »

josh2600 wrote: post #123

So most interview questions like "make a binary tree" are dead. The best interview question that will never die: "What's the weirdest bug you debugged? What made it weird?" For posterity: https://www.gamedeveloper.com/programming/my-hardest-bug-eve...

typically how much time might you get to answer a question like that?
Post reply on HN