Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ChatGPT, Rot13, and Daniel Kahneman

jameswillia.ms

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 213 posts

Re: ChatGPT, Rot13, and Daniel Kahneman

#161

Post by ivanche »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #126
joe_the_user wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you include a link that isn't a video that leaves my eyes and ears bleeding? Plus from the video: "do you have a thorough idea what OpenAI is doing, neither do I" - cut to strobe light and rock music. Jeesh, can't see that as support.

It's just a guy talking. > Plus from the video: "do you have a thorough idea what OpenAI is doing, neither do I" - cut to strobe light and rock music. Jeesh, can't see that as support. The hell are you talking about? There's no strobe there, he just goes to a slide with a white background, and the music is very quiet compared to his voice and not at all something I would call "rock".

> It's just a guy talking.

Maybe joe_the_user went overboard with calling it strobe light, but this is definitely not "just a guy talking". I don't know how people call this style of videos but it's very tiresome - constantly zooming in and out, full of sound effects (glass breaking, snaring, what not), changing backgrounds, changing lights, everything is just uncontrollably moving and shaking every 5-10 seconds or so.

Re: ChatGPT, Rot13, and Daniel Kahneman

#162

Post by [deleted] »

tkgally wrote: post #72

I find it amusing that, at present, ChatGPT seems to be lousy at mathematical-type reasoning while being very good at natural language use. That is the opposite of what many people, including me, have come to expect of computers. I have worked for many years in translation, lexicography, and language education, and I am flabbergasted at how well ChatGPT handles natural language. It can produce example sentences of po…

[deleted]

Re: ChatGPT, Rot13, and Daniel Kahneman

#163

Post by ClumsyPilot »

ravi-delia wrote: post #135
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This indicates it equally unreliable at a broad range of tasks. Applying it in self driving, life insurance, etc. will produce terrible outcomes.

Eh, the squishier the task the better it performs. It's ability to decode base 64 couldn't be less related

Ehat is the basis for this claim? Same algorythm and dataset are used, the only difference is that we suck at detecting errors in squishy tasks.

Squishy tasks is where people purposefully hide corruption, fraud and discrimination

Re: ChatGPT, Rot13, and Daniel Kahneman

#164

Post by Morgawr »

tkgally wrote: post #72

I find it amusing that, at present, ChatGPT seems to be lousy at mathematical-type reasoning while being very good at natural language use. That is the opposite of what many people, including me, have come to expect of computers. I have worked for many years in translation, lexicography, and language education, and I am flabbergasted at how well ChatGPT handles natural language. It can produce example sentences of po…

> In a week of testing, I have yet to see ChatGPT make any grammatical mistakes in either English or Japanese.

I've seen it make mistakes in Japanese in the very first prompt I gave it (which also answered incorrectly)[0].

I don't know why people are convinced ChatGPT is good with languages, I've been trying stuff with Japanese and most of the time it's just incredibly wrong to the point of being counterproductive to anyone who's trying to learn the language or practice translation.

What it is good at is approximating human language in a fluent-looking manner (which is incredibly impressive, I agree with you on that), but it's TOO GOOD at bullshitting its way through most explanations to the point where it will look natural and fluent in a different language if you're not very skilled at it or a native speaker and I've seen people who are very fluent in Japanese get tricked into believing some Japanese wordsoup that was spat out by ChatGPT. I'm impressed by the technology, I'm scared by the legion of people who will just blindly trust this garbage, honestly.

[0] - https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/189601264424714241/10... (note なさいのだ is nonsense both grammatically and logically)

Re: ChatGPT, Rot13, and Daniel Kahneman

#165

Post by theGnuMe »

thedorkknight wrote: post #94
theGnuMe wrote: post #92

I gave chatgpt some python code and it told me that the loop would never execute, determined what was wrong with it and suggested a change which it then said would never terminate unless a check was added.

Was it correct?

Yes

Re: ChatGPT, Rot13, and Daniel Kahneman

#166

Post by abc_lisper »

saurik wrote: post #139
abc_lisper wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think so too. https://twitter.com/gorrepati/status/1601033566405931009

That user's account's tweets are protected :(.

Sorry.. try this https://twitter.com/gorrepati/status/1601046917009772544

Re: ChatGPT, Rot13, and Daniel Kahneman

#167

Post by [deleted] »

Morgawr wrote: post #164
tkgally wrote: post #72

I find it amusing that, at present, ChatGPT seems to be lousy at mathematical-type reasoning while being very good at natural language use. That is the opposite of what many people, including me, have come to expect of computers. I have worked for many years in translation, lexicography, and language education, and I am flabbergasted at how well ChatGPT handles natural language. It can produce example sentences of po…

> In a week of testing, I have yet to see ChatGPT make any grammatical mistakes in either English or Japanese. I've seen it make mistakes in Japanese in the very first prompt I gave it (which also answered incorrectly)[0]. I don't know why people are convinced ChatGPT is good with languages, I've been trying stuff with Japanese and most of the time it's just incredibly wrong to the point of being counterproductive to…

[deleted]

Re: ChatGPT, Rot13, and Daniel Kahneman

#168

Post by Morgawr »

mjsweet wrote: post #115
tkgally wrote: post #72

I find it amusing that, at present, ChatGPT seems to be lousy at mathematical-type reasoning while being very good at natural language use. That is the opposite of what many people, including me, have come to expect of computers. I have worked for many years in translation, lexicography, and language education, and I am flabbergasted at how well ChatGPT handles natural language. It can produce example sentences of po…

I have found the same. I was asking it yesterday about calculating rental yields for our rental property. Usually it understands the context from the whole thread, but I found myself repeating myself a lot when asking new questions about possible scenarios. This is at odds with how well it knows the aws-cli, ffmpeg and yt-dlp… and bash. My productivity at the command prompt has skyrocketed… but it really flounders wi…

I would recommend not using it to do any kind of even simple calculations. It's VERY bad at it but what is dangerous is that it makes the answer look subtly plausible.

I've tried to use it to calculate averages between 10 or so numbers and every time I ask it the same exact question I get an "average" number back that looks plausible but is slightly different every time. Then I whip out the calculator and measure it myself and it's an answer that ChatGPT never gave me.

It's *really* dangerous to use this to do any kind of important calculations like financial stuff.

Re: ChatGPT, Rot13, and Daniel Kahneman

#169

Post by _ache_ »

teovall wrote: post #95
teovall wrote: post #88

It's able to do base64 encoding decoding pretty well, at least if you tell it to simulate a Linux terminal first. https://i.imgur.com/MHxjVHy.png I want you to act as a Linux terminal. I will type commands and you will reply with what the terminal should show. I want you to only reply with the terminal output inside one unique code block, and nothing else. Do not write explanations. Do not type commands unless I inst…

After some more testing, you can even enter base64 encoded text directly as an input and if you do, it usually base64 encodes its response. V2h5IGRpZCB0aGUgY2hpY2tlbiBjcm9zcyB0aGUgcm9hZD8= SXQgaXMgbm90IGNsZWFyIHdoYXQgeW91IGFyZSBhc2tpbmcgYWJvdXQsIGNvdWxkIHlvdSBwbGVhc2UgcmVnaXN0ZXIgdGhlIHF1ZXN0aW9uIGluIGEgbW9yZSBjbGVhciBhbmQgZGlzY3Vzc2libGUgd2F5PyBJIGNhbiBoZWxwIHlvdSB3aXRoIGFueSBxdWVzdGlvbnMgeW91IG1pZ2h0IGhhdmUgYWJvdXQ…

Well ... Only for english sentences.

If the prompt is a French question (encoded in base64)

> I'm sorry, but I'm unable to understand that message as it appears to be encoded in a way that I cannot interpret. Can you please provide more context or explain what you are trying to communicate?

But if the sentence contains `base64` (encoded in base64) it explains in spanish what is base64 !

Re: ChatGPT, Rot13, and Daniel Kahneman

#170

Post by tulio_ribeiro »

I think it's unfair to criticize ChatGPT based on flawed or unrepresentative examples. Like any tool, ChatGPT has limitations, but it can also be very useful if used properly. It's important to give the model a fair chance by providing clear and well-formed prompts, rather than expecting it to perform well with poor inputs. Using a hammer the wrong way and then blaming the tool for not driving nails properly is not a fair or accurate evaluation. In my experience, ChatGPT has often been able to provide accurate responses when given appropriate prompts.

Given a proper prompt, it gave me the right answer on my first try:

Me: Here it goes: Jul qvq gur puvpxra pebff gur ebnq?

ChatGPT: Based on the ROT13 substitution method, the decoded message would be: "Why did the chicken cross the road?" This is the most likely original message, since it matches the length of the encrypted message and uses only letters that are part of the ROT13 substitution. However, since I do not have access to the internet, I cannot confirm if this is the exact original message.

Post reply on HN