GPT-Prompt-Engineer • Hacker News Board

Re: GPT-Prompt-Engineer

#161

Post by otikik » Thu, Jul 13, 2023, 5:19 PM UTC

flangola7 wrote: post #102

otikik wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course there is strong correlation. That is literally what it was designed to do. The problem is that it will simultaneously say that "cow eggs are bigger than chicken eggs", with the same confidence (and in a way that correlates well with human evaluators). https://www.reddit.com/r/Funnymemes/comments/10ohd2n/chatgpt... So when you get an evaluation you are playing the russian roulette - you may get a decent resu…

I just asked and it told me cows are mammals and do not lay eggs. That Reddit post is not even GPT-4 and is 5 months old, which may as well be the 19th century on AI tech timescales.

You are concentrating on the details and avoiding the point.

The point is that the tool fails, and it is known to fail, so much that we even have a name for the times when it fails - hallucinations. I have been calling them cow eggs because that's a nice mental image and I didn't want to have to remember for the proper English term. I will continue calling them cow eggs.

Re: GPT-Prompt-Engineer

#162

Post by hoc » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 5:17 AM UTC

dontupvoteme wrote: post #147

hoc wrote: post #10

Doug Adams would've had so much fun these days.

Imagine what Russell or Wittgenstein would think of all this.

Hm. The idea of allowing a transform without actual reasoning to act as speech... source of new chapters of their work or of total despair.

Just ask ChatGPT to not say a thing.

Re: GPT-Prompt-Engineer

#163

Post by hoc » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 5:43 AM UTC

Deestan wrote: post #16

hoc wrote: post #10

Doug Adams would've had so much fun these days.

His genius laid in not only seeing which technologies were coming, but predicting what perversions business people would twist it into.

Well, I am intrigued by the obvious analogies of Deep Thought and the prompt engineers (and their upcoming tools and their respective complexities) while on the other hand I already see the upcoming war between simple and dumb business interests on both sides that will try to make the fascinating und useful concept (which it is after all) consumable on one side while the other side will be ready to kill it if they don't get paid for it using/refrencing/quoting their pieces of work in its answers or "thinking"/modelling. Probably resulting in a cripled tool if politics won't visibly value educational gain over commercial interest.

Pain and joke too often come as closely bundled as within Adams's pointed work.

Re: GPT-Prompt-Engineer

#164

Post by judge2020 » Sat, Jul 15, 2023, 11:50 PM UTC

rTX5CMRXIfFG wrote: post #105

judge2020 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's if you're trying to become a scientist. You can do science even if your experiment doesn't contain any of those elements besides trying multiple things and observing the outcomes.

At this point you’re just deliberately making the definition of “science” ambiguous to conveniently support your point.

Is calling someone (or a fictional character) a "mad scientist" incorrect just because they don't follow every step of the scientific method?

Re: GPT-Prompt-Engineer

#165

Post by namaria » Thu, Jul 20, 2023, 1:01 PM UTC

l33t233372 wrote: post #159

namaria wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Peer review has been a thing since, albeit in a much less rigorous way, at least the XVII century. The so-called 'republic of letters' was a world (europe) wide society of philosophers, mathematicians, and early experimenters sharing results and data in writing. Mathematicians have been publishing proofs and challenging each other in Europe since at least the Italian Risorgimento...

Does the fact that it’s old mean it’s part of the scientific method?

That fact that it's part of the scientific method makes it part of the scientific method. I was addressing the "is it recent" bit.

Re: GPT-Prompt-Engineer

#166

Post by namaria » Thu, Jul 20, 2023, 1:30 PM UTC

Kerb_ wrote: post #160

namaria wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, the same way I can practice medicine by putting leeches on people. I'm not trying to become a physician so it's alright to call that medicine.

You could take some classes and learn how and when to apply leeches and become a physician call it medicine too. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/article/leeches-...

Yes, because practicing Medicine is about a whole apparatus of agreed upon practices, not pick and choosing and slapping a label on it. Much like the case with doing Science, which is what I was getting at.