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

301–310 of 544 posts

Re: CheatGPT

#301

Post by CamperBob2 »

hgsgm wrote: post #292
CamperBob2 wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"One time, I was working on a project where the UI kept freezing when a certain button was pressed. I spent hours debugging the code, but couldn't figure out what was causing the problem. Eventually, I discovered that the button's event handler was accidentally triggering an infinite loop that was consuming all the CPU resources, causing the UI to freeze. It was a weird bug because the symptoms were not immediately o…

Please don't put blockquotes in code blocks.

Please ask dang (or, I suppose, pg) to implement features that were table stakes in the BBS scene in 1985.

Come to think of it, ChatGPT could probably do the job mostly by itself, given the right prompt.

Re: CheatGPT

#302

Post by [deleted] »

krembanan wrote: post #274
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…

Software development isn't really about just acquiring and memorising knowledge to later spit out. You need reasoning, logic and creativity. That AGI can develop complex new software (not just some code that has been scraped of the internet years ago) in 10 years is something I doubt.

[deleted]

Re: CheatGPT

#303

Post by matwood »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #150
stillsleepy wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the other week i gave chatgpt a simple multiplication problem that it got wrong. very simple problem like 86 * 0.0007 or something. but ive been working with chatgpt for 4-5 weeks now and that wrong answer doesnt make up for all the "good answers" that are usually not perfect. like one day i needed to COALESCE in mysql. i didnt know that, but chatgpt did. theres a few times i would have written a function the complic…

Why would you use chatGPT as a calculator? Use a calculator for that.

Because of the hype people think ChatGPT can do anything.

Re: CheatGPT

#304

Post by busyant »

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…

> I would rather this author be writing about how he is going to re-examine how he teaches rather than bemoaning that students can shortcut his current approach.

He alludes to this: "The first solution is hard for lots of reasons, not least that the current funding model of post-secondary institutions, which does not prioritize the ratio of faculty-to-students necessary for ever more personalized or real-time assessment methods. Larger and larger classes make many of these good ideas impractical. Faculty have zero control over this, but by all means, please talk to our senior leadership. It would be great."

In other words, the Universities are pushing "on-line-all-the-time" because it's co$t effective.

Re: CheatGPT

#305

Post by JohnFen »

babyshake wrote: post #288
jacobjjacob wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what an LLM is best at is fooling people into thinking it’s intelligent. It is really good at saying things in a natural sounding way, and statistically often getting it right, because certain strings of tokens are encoded. But it’s clear when you start poking that it just as easily tells you that 5/2=3, or that 2+2 != 4. it doesn’t model math or any sort of knowledge at all.

Something that I don't quite understand is why the tendency of ChatGPT to be inaccurate sometimes is a fundamental flaw rather than something that can be improved on iteratively if its just a matter of improving the statistical likelihood of accuracy. The question of whether its AGI or not is, to paraphrase the famous quote, a bit like the question of whether a submarine can swim.

Because ChatGPT isn't thinking. It's not reasoning at all. It's assembling sentences that are statistically predicted from using existing writings as the template.

Accuracy isn't a part of the process except in terms of how accurate the training data is. ChatGPT is not making any sort of truth or accuracy determination, let alone doing so poorly.

Re: CheatGPT

#306

Post by lmm »

hgsgm wrote: post #272
grogenaut wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the smartest I ever felt was hearing some teammates a cube wall over saying "this one customer from poland says he's crashing a lot" (in our ui). I was like "is he in the polish locale/language? They asked.... yes... "I bet polish has different seperators and our split("/")[1] is crashing"... they checked, had him change to english, crash went away. I felt real yoda like. We had customer on chat so much easier…

Debugging is easy when you know you are coding incorrectly. But why would Polish have a different path separator? That's a filesystem choice not a language choice.

Windows uses 0x5C as the path separator, and the character rendering of that codepoint is locale-dependent (most famously in Japanese encodings it's ¥). Apparently in most Polish encodings it's still \, although there's one obscure one where it becomes Ś.

Re: CheatGPT

#307

Post by kulahan »

babyshake wrote: post #288
jacobjjacob wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what an LLM is best at is fooling people into thinking it’s intelligent. It is really good at saying things in a natural sounding way, and statistically often getting it right, because certain strings of tokens are encoded. But it’s clear when you start poking that it just as easily tells you that 5/2=3, or that 2+2 != 4. it doesn’t model math or any sort of knowledge at all.

Something that I don't quite understand is why the tendency of ChatGPT to be inaccurate sometimes is a fundamental flaw rather than something that can be improved on iteratively if its just a matter of improving the statistical likelihood of accuracy. The question of whether its AGI or not is, to paraphrase the famous quote, a bit like the question of whether a submarine can swim.

The whole point of using a computer instead of doing something yourself is to do something quickly and accurately. If I need someone to give me maybe-correct-maybe-not information, I'll just ask one of my coworkers.

Re: CheatGPT

#308

Post by Al-Khwarizmi »

As a CS professor myself, I don't think ChatGPT really creates entirely new problems for assessment, but rather makes problems that we had been sweeping under the carpet more obvious and harder to ignore.

Any assignment that can be cheated by using ChatGPT could already be cheated before by asking a friend, an expert or paying someone else to do it.

But most teachers assumed this doesn't happen often, and thus acted as if it wasn't a thing. Making life much simpler and easier.

Facing ChatGPT will probably help us make assessment fairer in the long run (and the path is probably going to be a lot of traditional on-site assessment, abandoning the continuous assessment fad that has always been rather disastrous for equity, even if again, life is easier ignoring this).

Re: CheatGPT

#309

Post by neilv »

BoorishBears wrote: post #278
neilv wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would 100% accept that as an answer since it tells me the candidate is not good with subtext, [...] if I ask "what's your favorite food you've ever eaten", there's an unspoken implication that it's a food you remember eating. Will this filter cut many of the best engineers? Our field is full of people who pull 'engineering' out of our behinds, to various degrees. I'd assert that the engineer who doesn't assume an…

> Will this filter cut many of the best engineers? It won't cut out a single good engineer, let alone the best. > I'd assert that the engineer who doesn't assume an unspoken implication, but instead qualifies their answer, or tells you when they cannot answer, or asks for clarification... is more likely to be the one who can make a system that works, and tell you when a system will not work. You grouped the one optio…

You seem to be emphasizing this, and I'd like to understand why.

Have you seen an engineer that "shut down" on some problem, and you believe it was due to the kind of situation for which you're now trying to test?

Re: CheatGPT

#310

Post by JohnFen »

iameli wrote: post #284
kurisufag wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

People seem so convinced of this and I just don't get it. I'm seeing this comment through my eyeballs, generating some pertinent text in my brain, and outputting it back out. But so many people seem convinced convinced this process is something radically, fundamentally, irreducibly different than what ChatGPT is doing internally, and I don't get why. Is it because I have a consciousness with an internal narrative and…

It's because whatever you and I are doing, it's not simply statistical analysis. That is all that ChatGPT is doing.

It may be possible to create a machine that flirts with actual intelligence, but this is simply not it. There's not even room for doubt about this.

Post reply on HN