31–40 of 243 posts
This is incredibly, incredibly naive. "Within minutes, I learned" -- absolutely nothing. At most you've learned how the answers to your question would sound like. They are not the answers .
How sure are you about that?
I'm in two minds about it. On one hand the internet (in general) has become so hard to find information on, and I agree with the author that GPT is a breath of fresh air. On the other hand I've seen GPT fail so miserably at topics that I'm knowledge about that I have a very hard time trusting anything it tells me. I'm not sure what the answer really is, but I'm not sure it's GPT. I wish we could go back to having sea…
It's become hard, and will become harder, precisely because of things like GPT (unintentionally) spreading misinformation. I'm against censorship in general, and this is no exception, but I do hope it leads to people becoming more critical of what they consume. However, I suspect that instead we will unfortunately see the continued cycle of creating large masses of people "educated" on such widely-propagated half-tru…
In an ideal world, people would learn only from high quality sources like books and schools. But a shocking amount of people learn mostly through social media and whatever they find on Google.
I think LLMs will provide a better alternative.
This is so ridiculous. GPT is like that "know-it-all" friend we have who just has something to say about anything , with knowledge skimmed from the internet. GPT is a language model. It outputs what you want to hear , not what is correct.
Nonsense. How could it possibly know "what you want to hear"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They are not the answers. You can't possibly know that.
I can. Even if the answers accidentally happen to be correct, that's just the broken clock happens to be correct twice a day. The information value of answers by ChatGPT is zero .
As I said in https://simonwillison.net/2023/Apr/8/llms-break-the-internet...
> This is the thing I worry that people are sleeping on. People who think “these language models lie to you all the time” (which they do) and “they will produce buggy code with security holes”—every single complaint about these things is true, and yet, despite all of that, the productivity benefits you get if you lean into them and say OK, how do I work with something that’s completely unreliable, that invents things, that comes up with APIs that don’t exist… how do I use that to enhance my workflow anyway?
This is so ridiculous. GPT is like that "know-it-all" friend we have who just has something to say about anything , with knowledge skimmed from the internet. GPT is a language model. It outputs what you want to hear , not what is correct.
> It outputs what you want to hear Nonsense. How could it possibly know "what you want to hear"?
"How do I do this"
"How do I do that"
"What is this"
"What is that"
References:
This is incredibly, incredibly naive. "Within minutes, I learned" -- absolutely nothing. At most you've learned how the answers to your question would sound like. They are not the answers .
How sure are you about that?
I have not found these explanations sufficient, while I have done a bit of chemistry and physics I understand the basics of light emissions, but reading this has the same value as reading the wiki article on LEDs to me.
It is very helpful to learn new stuff indeed, I am personally using https://www.phind.com .
It didn't give a wrong answer when asked "Is there a digital to analog converter with an 8V analog range and serial input?", which another poster (mhb) had shown to trip up plain GPT4.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How sure are you about that?
I mean did you read the discussion he had with the language model? Does it clarify anything better than you would get by skimming wikipedia? I have not found these explanations sufficient, while I have done a bit of chemistry and physics I understand the basics of light emissions, but reading this has the same value as reading the wiki article on LEDs to me.
I'm in two minds about it. On one hand the internet (in general) has become so hard to find information on, and I agree with the author that GPT is a breath of fresh air. On the other hand I've seen GPT fail so miserably at topics that I'm knowledge about that I have a very hard time trusting anything it tells me. I'm not sure what the answer really is, but I'm not sure it's GPT. I wish we could go back to having sea…
"I'm not sure what the answer really is, but I'm not sure it's GPT." My suggestion is to stick with it and get a feel for what it's good at. I've found that after a few months of using ChatGPT every day I've developed a pretty solid intuition for which questions are likely to get good answers and which are likely to trigger hallucinations. It's difficult to describe what those intuitions are though! One rule of thumb…
Uh, and sooo boringly, especially if there's even any tiny part of it that is developing or theoretical, and you want to learn about that part.
I've used the phrase/request "more obscure (perspectives/explanations/etc)" with GPT so many times.
(Try it, you might be surprised at alternative takes on things, takes which are not even necessarily conspiracy theories and such)
...Which has made me think: Maybe life is more boring, the more one thinks there are just really good one-and-done answers to most everything.