Don't believe ChatGPT – we do not offer a "phone lookup" service

Post by rrrrrrrrrrrryan » Fri, Feb 24, 2023, 4:29 AM UTC

5555624 wrote: post #146

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reverse phone number lookup usually refers to finding a residential/business address tied to a phone number (historically a landline phone, but cell phones are also owned by people who have addresses), not the literal GPS location of the phone. I think white pages are still a thing, no? For the young 'uns - the white pages were part of the physical phone book in every city. You got a new phone book delivered to your…

> The crazy part is: almost everyone added their numbers voluntarily to the white pages, because you wanted people to be able to easily find and reach you. The default was that your number would be in the phone book, it was not voluntary. If you wanted an unlisted number, you had to pay for it.

Post by fijiaarone » Fri, Feb 24, 2023, 4:34 AM UTC

austinshea wrote: post #79

CactusOnFire wrote: post #6

Because ChatGPT is so new, we are in this weird period where people haven't learned that is just as incorrect as the rest of us. I am hoping that in a year from now people will be more skeptical of what they hear from conversational AI. But perhaps that is optimistic of me.

It’s not incorrect like the rest of us. It’s incorrect in a very different way. Providing detailed information on the usage of a service that has never existed is a brand new kind of incorrect that is carelessly causing the rest of us grief.

Post by qualudeheart » Fri, Feb 24, 2023, 4:37 AM UTC

wwwpatdelcom wrote: post #141

crazygringo wrote: post #54

I'm curious -- does anyone know of ML directions that could add any kind of factual confidence level to ChatGPT and similar? We all know now that ChatGPT is just autocomplete on steroids. It produces plausibly convincing patterns of speech. But from the way it's built and trained, it's not like there's even any kind of factual confidence level you could threshold, or anything. The concept of factuality doesn't exist…

Deepmind is an LLM with a fact verifier attached, though the fact verifier is actually a ranked list of code compile times. Obviously this is a narrow subset of specific problems, but one could expand that library of problems over time.

Post by krainboltgreene » Fri, Feb 24, 2023, 4:40 AM UTC

renewiltord wrote: post #46

Xylakant wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because ChatGPT is so new, we are in this weird period where people haven't learned that is just as incorrect as the rest of us. It’s worse than that. It’s wrong, you cannot correct it and it makes up supporting citations on the fly. Very few humans behave like that.

I think very many humans behave like that, actually. A recent example is people claiming that Flint, MI still has leaded water. But in the past, HN users "corroborated" that Apple is spying on them etc. Fabrication is well and alive among us.

Post by gfody » Fri, Feb 24, 2023, 4:48 AM UTC

vgeek wrote: post #180

rosywoozlechan wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there's no "actual phone lookup platform" you can't get a person's location by knowing their phone number, that's a huge privacy violation. You can get the location of your own phone via icloud or google's system for android. You could also install an app on your phone to track your phone's location. You cannot find people based on knowing their phone number, that would be a serious safety issue for you know people t…

That is widely known about and freely available to the public, maybe. There are multiple options available for pseudo-LE types with relatively lax access prerequisites. https://www.robertxiao.ca/hacking/locationsmart/ is an example of one provider's public demo (requiring only a phone number) being used to provide non-consensual location data.