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

511–520 of 544 posts

Re: CheatGPT

#511

Post by JohnFen »

boroboro4 wrote: post #377
JohnFen wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> through various kinds of data abstraction, reasoning by analogy, and other techniques similar to what humans do. No, that's exactly not how LLMs work. They are extremely good at predicting what sentences resemble the sentences in their training data and creating those. That's all. People are getting tripped up because they are seeing legitimate intelligence in the output from these systems -- but that intelligence…

I’ve just asked gpt3 to sum two large random numbers and it gave me correct sum of them. Then I’ve defined fibanachi like sequence (f1=1, f2=1, fn=fn_1 + fn_2 + 7) and it correctly gave me the value of 10th element. It’s not just statistical model to generate something resembling training set, it does understand training set, to similar extents as we understand world around us…

I don't see how your example demonstrates your hypothesis, though. Summing two numbers and telling the next number in the Fibonacci sequence would be expected from a deep and complex statistical modelling of the existing internet data.

Re: CheatGPT

#512

Post by [deleted] »

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?")

[deleted]

Re: CheatGPT

#513

Post by JohnFen »

jesterman wrote: post #361
JohnFen wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An LLM will never be able to produce something that cannot be statistically derived from its training data. So... creating a new language, maybe?

I see what you are going with here for it not being able to come up with original things. But I think that falls apart when you realize almost nothing humans do is original, everything is just building on other things.

The vast majority of what people do is this, yes. Just like how most of the time, we're all running on autopilot and our behaviors are pretty much just following scripts. "Meat robots".

But it's not 100%.

Re: CheatGPT

#514

Post by JohnFen »

School-Cotton wrote: post #353
JohnFen wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> whatever you and I are doing, it's not simply statistical analysis. How do you know?

Because I have seen genuine creativity and invention.

Re: CheatGPT

#515

Post by JohnFen »

djleni wrote: post #378
JohnFen wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. But I don't have to do that to understand that LLMs do not assess truth or accuracy of anything.

I don’t think it’s a stretch to say humans aren’t great at assessing the truth or accuracy of anything either.

My point isn't about how good or bad this is being done. Humans, at least some of the time, attempt to assess truth and accuracy of things. LLMs do not attempt to do this.

That's why I think it's incorrect to say they're bad at it. Even attempting it isn't in their behavior set.

Re: CheatGPT

#516

Post by Sophira »

Sophira wrote: post #506
consumer451 wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great follow up! Well this is very interesting. I pasted your prompt into a new chat just now and I got the correct answer: > One cubic foot of nails and one cubic foot of feathers both have the same volume, but nails are denser than feathers. Therefore, one cubic foot of nails will be heavier than one cubic foot of feathers. Are you using the free version at chat.openai.com? Does it say Feb 13 version at the bottom?

I am, yes. However, I did initially misspell the prompt to say "heaver", and with the misspelling it had answered correctly. Once I corrected it to "heavier", it then came up with the wrong answer. Looking at it with fresh eyes, it's possible that my methodology was flawed. While I only ever intended to showcase the first response, I did also try regenerating the responses a few times. While normally this wouldn't ma…

As a follow-up, I tried again in a new thread and it still got it wrong in almost the exact same way:

> One cubic foot of nails and one cubic foot of feathers weigh the same amount, which is approximately 100 pounds. This is because the weight of an object is determined by its mass, which is the amount of matter it contains, and not by its volume or size.

> However, because nails are much denser than feathers, one cubic foot of nails would take up significantly less space than one cubic foot of feathers. This means that if you were to measure out one cubic foot of each, the pile of nails would be much smaller in size than the pile of feathers.

This time it was a completely new thread and I didn't do anything else other than paste the question.

Re: CheatGPT

#517

Post by [deleted] »

dinkumthinkum wrote: post #234
resource0x wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

[deleted]

Re: CheatGPT

#518

Post by asdff »

jefftk wrote: post #498
asdff wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly I appreciate the exercise pentesting my hypothetical academic computer. Lets drop full network access entirely then. Allow it to only connect to a university intranet for assignment deposits, along with plenty of logging of what happened on the device. Lets rule out the "typing verbatim" method too by checking whether the user typed in all in one go or spent time debugging and revising using our own keylogge…

I do think you can get to something where cheating is enough more work than doing it honestly (or at least you need to manually type things over). But while we started with a "just issue an rPi" we're now at "issue a modified laptop running a large amount of custom security software".

Issuing a modified laptop running a large amount of custom security software at least seems like an IT departments bread and butter. Maybe if the issue gets big enough microsoft sells a dedicated educational laptop that's preconfigured as such (akin to google's chromebook), but since they own chatgpt they can presumably bake in even more internal controls to flag putative chatgpt content.

If the problem gets widespread, seems like there are possible responses that could and would be made. Just like how in time, schools went from letting you upload your essay and that's that, to running that essay through plagiarism software and baking the tech into their disciplinary process.

Re: CheatGPT

#519

Post by [deleted] »

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?")

[deleted]

Re: CheatGPT

#520

Post by [deleted] »

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?")

[deleted]
Post reply on HN