Very very offtopic:
He called ChatGPT oracle, nice but not enough.
I want someone to name chatbot their `oracle of delphi` plz. thank you.
Chatbots are not the future
11–20 of 156 posts
Re: Chatbots are not the future
#12TL;DR, more targeted tools could be more helpful for specific tasks than an unstructured text interface for everything.
Re: Chatbots are not the future
#13I don't know why it hadn't occurred to me before now, that using ChatGPT is quite to similar to playing Zork and Infocom games from the 1980s, with less trial and error needed to get something out of it.
The point and click adventure games from Sierra and Lucas Arts were a huge step forward in interaction, although you didn't have to use your imagination as much to solve the puzzles.
And here we are again asking users to type their way to success.
Re: Chatbots are not the future
#14Yeah, chat isn’t a universally great interface. But it’s a great default because it’s totally free form. It should be pretty easy (even with today’s APIs and technology) to have an LLM design a user interface for you for your current task. Simplest way: output a JSON of simple control definitions with every answer. Coolest way: Just have it generate a full-ass React front end or whatever on every message.
Interesting. Futuristic idea: on-the-fly generate a front-end customized to the user learned preferences. Motivation: humans are poor learners, so save them the trouble to learn a new interface style. At the limit, real-time generate a whole world-in-the-world, fulfill Zuckerberg's dream -- an utterly lonely Matrix. Now that's a thinly sugar-coated version of the Hell described in e.g. Catholic doctrine. And we will chose it ourselves. Deeply sobering.
Re: Chatbots are not the future
#15> When I go up the mountain to ask the ChatGPT oracle a question, I am met with a blank face. What does this oracle know?
I think if your attitude is that its an oracle, then you already have the wrong attitude for using the tool. Chatgpt is a tool, if you dont know how to use the tool, stop complaining that you don't like it. Imagine telling everyone scalpels are horrible tools because they tried to perform surgery on someone and botched it up.
One day, not too far off, we are going to be able to tell a 'chat bot': make me a cartoon, it takes place in a steam punk fantasy. make it 2 seasons with 22 episodes each season. great, add a cliff hanger at the end of episode 11. add a love story component to it. reduce it back down to 1 season but 44 minute episodes.
content creation is no longer going to be tied back to knowing how to draw cartoons, or have armies of writers. yes, we can get garbage out of the system. but its a tool, plenty of tools produce garbage results if you dont know how to use them.
As an experiment, I asked chatgpt to write a business plan (one my brother started). The business plan was very close to what my brother produced, after working on it for a month. That's powerful, that's worthy of being 'the future'.
Re: Chatbots are not the future
#16Someone said that using a chat-only interface is like using CLI tools. It's even worse, I would add, because there is no autocomplete or man command to help you out. Most of us here probably get it, but my dad had a hard time getting a good answer from GPT when he first tried it, even with GPT-4 model.
Hence the need for specially trained people who can do the back-and-forth with humans to understand exactly what is required, then enter it (into the brittle prompt in this case) in a way that the computer would understand.
Re: Chatbots are not the future
#17Quality quote: "There's an ongoing trend pushing towards continuous consumption of shorter, mind-melting content. Have a few minutes? Stare at people putting on makeup on TikTok. Winding down for sleep? A perfect time to doomscroll 180-character hot takes on Twitter."
140 chars, he means.
*280 chars, he means.
*4000 chars, he means.
*10000 chars, he means.
Re: Chatbots are not the future
#18> When I go up the mountain to ask the ChatGPT oracle a question, I am met with a blank face. What does this oracle know? I think if your attitude is that its an oracle, then you already have the wrong attitude for using the tool. Chatgpt is a tool, if you dont know how to use the tool, stop complaining that you don't like it. Imagine telling everyone scalpels are horrible tools because they tried to perform surgery…
Yes, sure. But you know what makes most of human history's output of art, music, literature et al great? Intent, attention to detail and self-expression.
Broad strokes are broad strokes. I can procedurally generate levels all day long in a video game, but for me, they're never going to be as compelling or interesting as a lower-resolution and low quality textured game from the '90s or '00s where every single tree and rock is placed with intent.
I already think modern cartoons are fairly sterile and soulless versus their hand drawn or hybrid counterparts. It isn't even elitism, they just don't hold my attention or interest me artistically, stylistically, or in terms of content.
If you choose to express yourself in broad strokes, that's fine, whatever floats your boat. I'll continue to chase things that have intent and artistry behind every aspect of them. Generic and formulaic is generic and formulaic all day long. It's also why I don't like most modern anime, it's sterile visually and isn't why I enjoyed the medium.
Re: Chatbots are not the future
#19I don't know why it hadn't occurred to me before now, that using ChatGPT is quite to similar to playing Zork and Infocom games from the 1980s, with less trial and error needed to get something out of it. The point and click adventure games from Sierra and Lucas Arts were a huge step forward in interaction, although you didn't have to use your imagination as much to solve the puzzles. And here we are again asking user…
Chatgpt or a successor dynamically generating in-game dialogue could be fun. Or maybe it won't be. I'm interested in seeing it done.
Re: Chatbots are not the future
#20> Good tools make it clear how they should be used. This is such a weird statement from someone in the tech space. Programming languages rarely have an opinion for how they are to be used (for example JS MUST only run the browser or which code style to use). When I chat with customer support, I wish they could meet me where I am instead of me needing to learn their tools. For example, I want to say "cancel my subscri…
Actually, as i recall, that statement is somewhat foundational for human computer interaction...of course my recollection is from my HCI college course a couple of decades ago...But, yeah, whenever i make something - digital or otherwise - i hope to design it properly enough that the intended user intuitively understands how it should be used. (I do add documentation beyond the base design, but because i want to further help the person.)