91–100 of 235 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a black swan event which, if anything, vindicates the hype from dreamers who were ahead of their time. They had a lot of the theory right but lacked the horsepower. This will complete the last mile for other AI tech and be the lacquer that gives it the all important finishing touch.
"This is a black swan event" By definition, black swan events are unpredictable. This example isn't that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect that humans have an accuracy lower than 99.999%, and are similarly capable of producing confidently incorrect results. GPT has a lot of hype and hysteria around it, but demanding 100% accuracy from it is a bit over the top imo. It doesn't need to have 100% accuracy on any arbitrary prompt in order to be a useful and valuable tool.
"It doesn't need to have 100% accuracy on any arbitrary prompt in order to be a useful and valuable tool." Yet anything less than represents a danger. Never underestimate stupid.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a black swan event which, if anything, vindicates the hype from dreamers who were ahead of their time. They had a lot of the theory right but lacked the horsepower. This will complete the last mile for other AI tech and be the lacquer that gives it the all important finishing touch.
"This is a black swan event" By definition, black swan events are unpredictable. This example isn't that.
If things keep going this way then pretty soon the black swans are going to outnumber the white ones.
I asked Chat GPT which antacid medications are contraindicated for some medication I'm on. Easily found through NICE. It made up a severe risk of death taking a very common medicine combo. It was super convincing, even giving information on how long to avoid taking them together. It was pure bullshit. I think as much as hyping the benefits we need to hype the flaws and dangers. If the public at large learn to trust t…
Because if feel this is pretty much already out of date. 4 does this _a lot_ less!
And 5, 6 or whatever will probably be better, so i don't even really get the point here.
I asked Chat GPT which antacid medications are contraindicated for some medication I'm on. Easily found through NICE. It made up a severe risk of death taking a very common medicine combo. It was super convincing, even giving information on how long to avoid taking them together. It was pure bullshit. I think as much as hyping the benefits we need to hype the flaws and dangers. If the public at large learn to trust t…
You should never medicate yourself after using a LLM, not in 2023 anyway! You should not run any code you have not vetted, or take any pills you don't know what they do.
So what are we discussing, is, should we try to put guardrails around dangerous things so that inexperienced/vulnerable people would not get damaged.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My hunch here is that, because of the sometimes haphazard hallucinations of ChatGPT, you would need to always review the code that ChatGPT has crated. Also as in a group of people you sometimes agree on specific styles, but I think that ChatGPT won’t adhere to such things, making its code unfamiliar and really hard to follow. We as humans have a hard time agreeing on how code should be written, does ChatGPT have a be…
> Also as in a group of people you sometimes agree on specific styles, but I think that ChatGPT won’t adhere to such things, making its code unfamiliar and really hard to follow. ChatGPT wont, but a facade variant specifically trained and marketed for code probably would. It could even had a configuration for coding style, formatting and linting rules, and programming paradigm (more functional, more declarative, inve…
But related to what I’ve seen on how ChatGPT express itself, I’d say it keeps on changing its style.
Edit: it seems like it may have some style but still fails to write it accurately[0].
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"This is a black swan event" By definition, black swan events are unpredictable. This example isn't that.
LLM emergence was unpredictable in 2017. Even for the best AI people.
I asked Chat GPT which antacid medications are contraindicated for some medication I'm on. Easily found through NICE. It made up a severe risk of death taking a very common medicine combo. It was super convincing, even giving information on how long to avoid taking them together. It was pure bullshit. I think as much as hyping the benefits we need to hype the flaws and dangers. If the public at large learn to trust t…
It always generates a random number when it is caught making up bullshit sometimes claims that the information 10/10 accurate and LLM's always provides accurate information.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Everything I've used ChatGPT for so far I could, more-or-less, have written or searched for myself in the time it took to get it out of chatgpt correctly. That's not even true. For one, it can stub a whole new function or coding project, intelligently, in a few seconds after the prompt, whether it's RoR or DSP code or whatever. For one unfamiliar with the domain, this can take hours or a full day, even with example…
> For one unfamiliar with the domain, this can take hours or a full day Yes, I did say expert. > But several times slower still than GPT. Almost all the output needs to be re-read, modified and integrated in the project. This often takes longer than just typing it out, even from docs -- because you're still forced to think through the solution -- which is most of the time. Typing is quick
You'd be very suprised. Try measuring it.
==Occupations with no labeled exposed tasks== Agricultural Equipment Operators Athletes and Sports Competitors Automotive Glass Installers and Repairers Bus and Truck Mechanics and Diesel Engine Specialists Cement Masons and Concrete Finishers Cooks, Short Order Cutters and Trimmers, Hand Derrick Operators, Oil and Gas Dining Room and Cafeteria Attendants and Bartender Helpers Dishwashers Dredge Operators Electrical…
Unfortunately, the great majority of these jobs are already being automated with basic robotics
* Athletes and Sports Competitors * Motorcycle Mechanics * Stonemasons
only to give some examples, where roboters are almost impossible.