I’ve seen this argument over and over again: it’s just predicting the next word, it’s not creating anything new, etc. How do we know we’re not doing the same or similar in our brains? We can’t even define creativity, intelligence, let alone tell how it works. Predicting the next word is very much part of an intelligent discourse. What if it’s all just a “computational guessing game” all the way down with perhaps a sp…
We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
151–160 of 425 posts
Re: We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
#152The BS that ChatGPT generates is especially odious because it requires so much effort to detect if you're not a SME in whatever output it's giving. Plus, the output, when wrong, is subtly wrong- it's usually not obvious BS, it's credible BS. If you are not competent in the particular area you're asking about, you likely don't have the skills to recognize BS. It also is a time saver, doing work that most people find u…
>if you're not a SME Small and Medium-sized Enterprise? What's SME in this instance?
Re: We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
#153The intensification of AI only makes me surfacely interested in cybernetic-thought from theorists like Gilles Deleuze, Norbert Wiener and, of course, William Gibson. But even from the outlandish Nick Land: "AI is a meta-scientific control system and an invader, with all the insidiousness of planetary techno-capital flipping over."[1] Whatever that means... But on the other hand, what a good time to revist the nature…
Re: We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
#154The BS that ChatGPT generates is especially odious because it requires so much effort to detect if you're not a SME in whatever output it's giving. Plus, the output, when wrong, is subtly wrong- it's usually not obvious BS, it's credible BS. If you are not competent in the particular area you're asking about, you likely don't have the skills to recognize BS. It also is a time saver, doing work that most people find u…
>if you're not a SME Small and Medium-sized Enterprise? What's SME in this instance?
Re: We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
#155I found the article really difficult to read, so I summarised it with ChatGPT Large language models like the GPT family are statistical models that learn the structure of language by predicting missing words in sentences. These models are seen as "bullshit generators" as they have no idea what they are talking about and are designed to produce baseless assertions with confidence. The addition of reinforcement learnin…
I’m not sure why we need comments from people proud that they couldn’t be troubled to read the article that is supposedly being discussed, but it seems like a popular genre of reply whenever something tech-critical is posted.
Re: We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
#156"ChatGPT isn't really new but simply an iteration of the class war that's been waged since the start of the industrial revolution." I'm scared too but this is literally neo-ludite sperging.
So the comparison is correct, but not in the way you mean, and as the luddites were right to break machines then so we are now.
Re: We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
#157The BS that ChatGPT generates is especially odious because it requires so much effort to detect if you're not a SME in whatever output it's giving. Plus, the output, when wrong, is subtly wrong- it's usually not obvious BS, it's credible BS. If you are not competent in the particular area you're asking about, you likely don't have the skills to recognize BS. It also is a time saver, doing work that most people find u…
I've found a good way to demonstrate to oneself how badly ChatGPT can miss not only the nuance of a subject but just plain get basic facts wrong is to ask it about relatively simple things like movie or book plots and see how the results differ from, well, just actually watching or reading the subject, eg.
--------
Prompt: Summarize the ending of the movie AI
--------
/In the movie "AI", the protagonist, a highly advanced android boy named David, embarks on a journey to find the Blue Fairy from the story of Pinocchio in order to become a real boy and be reunited with his human mother. After many trials, David finally reaches the submerged city where the Blue Fairy is said to reside, but instead finds a statue of the fairy. He is then discovered by human survivors of a global flood, who have been in suspended animation for thousands of years. The humans react with fear and attempt to dismantle David, but he is rescued by a mermaid, who takes him to the underwater kingdom of the lost city of Rome. There, he finally meets the Blue Fairy, who reveals that she has no power to grant his wish, but assures him that his love for his mother will live on forever. In the end, David is shown as a frozen statue, in a future where the sun has burned out and the Earth is covered in ice, while the human race has long since vanished. The last shot is of the statue of the Blue Fairy, still underwater, suggesting that David's story and love will endure for eternity./
--------
Its close enough to be believable if you haven't seen the movie (or maybe even if you have seen it but it was 20 years ago) but there's a lot of obvious errors packed into a relatively short paragraph there. Got off to a good start in the first two sentences and then just goes right off the rails... but with such confidence.
Re: We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
#158The BS that ChatGPT generates is especially odious because it requires so much effort to detect if you're not a SME in whatever output it's giving. Plus, the output, when wrong, is subtly wrong- it's usually not obvious BS, it's credible BS. If you are not competent in the particular area you're asking about, you likely don't have the skills to recognize BS. It also is a time saver, doing work that most people find u…
>if you're not a SME Small and Medium-sized Enterprise? What's SME in this instance?
Re: We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m not sure why we need comments from people proud that they couldn’t be troubled to read the article that is supposedly being discussed, but it seems like a popular genre of reply whenever something tech-critical is posted.
I tried to read the article too and found it both visually unpleasant and intellectually unfocused. GP is making the rather comically clever point that ChatGPT is useful to summarize text that might be difficult for humans to parse, even a text claiming that ChatGPT is a useless model only capable of spewing Islamophobic speech and in need of burying. I mean the article ends on some tangent about reactionary solution…
That's fine but then you're probably not in a position to have curious conversation about it. Which is also fine! But the solution to that is to find something else that's interesting to you, rather than to gunk up the thread for the people who are interested in discussing the piece.
Re: We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
#160I found the article really difficult to read, so I summarised it with ChatGPT Large language models like the GPT family are statistical models that learn the structure of language by predicting missing words in sentences. These models are seen as "bullshit generators" as they have no idea what they are talking about and are designed to produce baseless assertions with confidence. The addition of reinforcement learnin…
I’m not sure why we need comments from people proud that they couldn’t be troubled to read the article that is supposedly being discussed, but it seems like a popular genre of reply whenever something tech-critical is posted.
At this point if I see any variation of "bullshit generator" used to downplay the significance of LLMs I will instantly discount the author as a person who has already lost the plot.
Just smile politely and leave them to their devices as the world changes around them.