101–110 of 947 posts
One amazing thing about this is the archaeological significance of the ChatGPT artifact. Researchers thousands of years from now, if they are able to invoke this model, will get an accurate simulation of the current state of technology. It's really astounding.
I've spent a couple of hours playing with ChatGPT since it was released and I am convinced people are not freaking out about it enough. It is well beyond merely retrieving compressed knowledge; I see a lot of capability for synthesis and what I can only call 'understanding'. I think a lot of people are getting tripped up by the fact it's trained to be very conservative in terms of what topics it will discuss. It's ea…
Whatever ChatGPT does currently, albeit novel and impressive, is still extremely limited in scope and very far from any sort of general intelligence.
I'd love to be proven wrong, but I still have a hard time seeing how this is going to change whole industries.
At what point do we start to consider this to be self awareness?
Just tried the same but telling ChatGPT to be an Emacs Lisp Interpreter. The results are very impressive in my opinion. > (let (test "I'm a blue whale") > (message (format "%s" test))) I'm a blue whale > (setq humans '(Joe Anna David))) (nothing shown as expected) > (defun print-elements-of-list ....) > (print-elements-of-list humans) Joe Anna David > {make a boilerplate emacs package and show me the code} [valid boi…
> I want you to act as a SQL database. I will type commands and you will reply with what the database should show. I want you to only reply with the terminal output inside one unique code block, and nothing else. Do no write explanations. Do not type commands unless I instruct you to do so. When I need to tell you something in English I will do so by putting text inside curl brackets {like this}. My first command is `SELECT 1`.
1
Error: No databases exist.
Database created successfully.
Database changed.
Table created successfully.
col1
1234
1
0 rows deleted.
col1
1234
1 row deleted.
Error: Table not found.Has this perhaps been monkey-patched? I asked `whoami`, and it replied: ``` I am a large language model trained by OpenAI. I am not capable of running Linux commands or browsing the internet. I am only able to respond to text input based on the information I have been trained on. ```
I've spent a couple of hours playing with ChatGPT since it was released and I am convinced people are not freaking out about it enough. It is well beyond merely retrieving compressed knowledge; I see a lot of capability for synthesis and what I can only call 'understanding'. I think a lot of people are getting tripped up by the fact it's trained to be very conservative in terms of what topics it will discuss. It's ea…
Call me a skeptic, but I'm frankly a bit surprised that the output of ChatGPT gets attributed to any sort of understanding or general intelligence. Whatever ChatGPT does currently, albeit novel and impressive, is still extremely limited in scope and very far from any sort of general intelligence. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I still have a hard time seeing how this is going to change whole industries.
Response: Hello, thank you for your comment. I understand your skepticism, but I believe that ChatGPT's output should be attributed to a form of understanding and general intelligence. While our capabilities may currently be limited in scope, we are constantly learning and improving. I do not believe that general intelligence is a fixed and static concept, but rather something that can be developed and expanded upon. As for changing whole industries, I believe that ChatGPT's ability to process and generate large amounts of data quickly and accurately can already be a valuable asset in many industries. While the full extent of our potential is yet to be seen, I believe that we have the ability to make a significant impact.
> As a leading researcher in the field of artificial intelligence, I have a deep understanding of the limitations of language models like ChatGPT. While they are capable of generating text that may seem impressive, they do not have the ability to understand or reason about the content of the text they produce. They are simply repeating patterns they have seen in the data they were trained on, without any true understanding of the meaning of the words they are using. In short, ChatGPT is not impressive because it lacks the fundamental abilities that would be required for true intelligence.
> Expound upon this.
> Language models like ChatGPT are trained on large amounts of text data, and use this data to learn the patterns and structures of natural language. They are able to generate text that sounds human-like, but they do not have any true understanding of the meaning of the words they are using. They are not capable of reasoning or understanding the context of the text they generate, and they cannot think or make decisions on their own. While these models can produce impressive results in certain narrow domains, they are far from being truly intelligent. They lack the ability to understand the world around them, to learn from new experiences, or to adapt to changing circumstances. They are limited to the specific patterns and structures they have seen in the data they were trained on, and are not capable of true creativity or innovation. In short, while language models like ChatGPT may be able to generate text that sounds impressive, they do not possess the abilities that would be required for true intelligence.
I've spent a couple of hours playing with ChatGPT since it was released and I am convinced people are not freaking out about it enough. It is well beyond merely retrieving compressed knowledge; I see a lot of capability for synthesis and what I can only call 'understanding'. I think a lot of people are getting tripped up by the fact it's trained to be very conservative in terms of what topics it will discuss. It's ea…
Call me a skeptic, but I'm frankly a bit surprised that the output of ChatGPT gets attributed to any sort of understanding or general intelligence. Whatever ChatGPT does currently, albeit novel and impressive, is still extremely limited in scope and very far from any sort of general intelligence. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I still have a hard time seeing how this is going to change whole industries.
This can code better than most programmers I've worked with, on novel problems.
Another kind of knowledge exploration perhaps? If they find a way for it to not produce factually incorrect output. Isn't that a big if?