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

1-800-ChatGPT

help.openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 350 posts

Re: 1-800-ChatGPT

#281

Post by jenniferCrawdad »

slg wrote: post #272
jenniferCrawdad wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The comment thread you're at the end of started with this: > I would expect nothing but hallucinations and nonsense coming out of any LLM regarding recently-released movies (aka. the ones you often find on flights). The comment that replied to it (the one that you're arguing against) provides evidence that proves it wrong. You are correcting someone who isn't incorrect, and I think the person you're responding to is…

A reply downthread is not an endorsement of everything said upthread. I'm happy to discuss the points I made, but I’m not going to be made to defend something I didn’t say.

Well if you're not endorsing what was said upthread, then your comment is a complete non-sequitir. The parent comment said "LLMs can't give movie recommendations for recent movies because they'll hallucinate or spout nonsense", the next comment responds with a list of accurate movie recommendations, and then you come in and say this:

> Those descriptions are less detailed than the information you will see on basically any streaming interface and yet it still manages to not being very good.

The points you made were not relevant to the discussion at hand. It's like if people were having a debate about where to find the best tacos in town and you stepped in to say "tacos aren't as good as hamburgers, you know" and then got upset that nobody wanted to debate that point with you. It's not everybody else's fault if you don't understand how conversations work!

Re: 1-800-ChatGPT

#284

Post by conductr »

Alupis wrote: post #268
conductr wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the tech is in a move fast break things phase, not business critical to anyone and mostly just a toy

> not business critical to anyone and mostly just a toy Except it's business-critical to OpenAI, who hopes to look impressive when you call the number. Instead, for some unknown percentage of folks that call will become confused, or think OpenAI is a bit janky. Based on the anecdotes here, it seems the percentage of people who will experience this issue is not trivial either. My guess is OpenAI paid a truck load for…

Maybe. I’m sure it was calculated either way and their mistake to make. Could be that they are working in the background and have a plan to resolve before next week. I don’t think people in general have such high SLA expectations. It’s a minor blip in the grand scheme of things.

Re: 1-800-ChatGPT

#285

Post by themanmaran »

Sean-Der wrote: post #163
tigranbs wrote: post #144

OMG! Try calling from Microsoft Teams :D You will end up with, "Thanks for calling Agenta". Did OpenAI outsource and release this implementation with some of the company's internal phone numbers?

Not outsourced, I worked on it myself. This is the old owner of the number. Some carriers are still routing it wrong.

Ah I got the same result calling from Google Fi. Thought this was a weird April fools joke for a bit. Then third call and it went through to GPT. Telcom is weird!

Re: 1-800-ChatGPT

#286

Post by TRiG_Ireland »

swatcoder wrote: post #141
cco wrote: post #5

100% shipped to show off to family during Christmas. I'll definitely give it a go, I wonder if this lands better with those aged 50+ who are more used to phone calls rather than chat.

You're surely right that they anticipate it being be a novelty that people share during holiday visits. But as you can probably tell from the other replies, the idea that older people don't know how to use internet-era technology is a meme that was wearing thin 20 years ago already. People who haven't had ChatGPT "land" for them yet are likely just people who don't find themselves asking a lot of questions they need…

I genuinely have never had the slightest inclination to ask a chatbot anything, ever. I do not understand how people find them useful.

Re: 1-800-ChatGPT

#287

Post by zeroonetwothree »

crazygringo wrote: post #256
frakt0x90 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get it's just an example, but are we really this far gone? Just watch a random movie and if you don't like it, pick another. This is such an extreme micro-optimization of a small experience.

You don't often know if a movie is good until you've finished it, because it all depends on how the story came together in the end. You can spend 2 hours watching a moving, emotional story that teaches you something new about the human condition and the choices we make in our lives. Or you can spend 2 hours that turns out to be full of plot holes and inconsistent characters, where nothing makes sense in the end and y…

If you aren’t enjoying it then stop watching. And if you did enjoy it for 2 hours who cares what the review says.

Re: 1-800-ChatGPT

#288

Post by TRiG_Ireland »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #21
amclennon wrote: post #6

Between purchasing chat.com, and this new 800 number, I sometimes feel like OpenAI is really channeling that 90s dot com era energy.

Controversial take: LLMs are the first time in a while that I have felt like emerging technology trends is doing something cool and adding value. For the past 8-10 years it has all felt like a bunch of apps that just aim to be mediocre middlemen/gig economy brokers with bad customer service.

They're "adding" value they've stolen from artists and writers. It's an industry built on copyright infringement at a heroic scale.

Re: 1-800-ChatGPT

#289

Post by slg »

jenniferCrawdad wrote: post #281
slg wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A reply downthread is not an endorsement of everything said upthread. I'm happy to discuss the points I made, but I’m not going to be made to defend something I didn’t say.

Well if you're not endorsing what was said upthread, then your comment is a complete non-sequitir. The parent comment said "LLMs can't give movie recommendations for recent movies because they'll hallucinate or spout nonsense", the next comment responds with a list of accurate movie recommendations, and then you come in and say this: > Those descriptions are less detailed than the information you will see on basicall…

I don’t know why you are letting that one reply define the bounds of this conversation. My comment was directly relevant to the first comment in this thread and the comment I was replying to.

Re: 1-800-ChatGPT

#290

Post by TRiG_Ireland »

abixb wrote: post #46
dghlsakjg wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Controversial take: LLMs are the first time in a while that I have felt like emerging technology trends is doing something cool and adding value. For the past 8-10 years it has all felt like a bunch of apps that just aim to be mediocre middlemen/gig economy brokers with bad customer service.

I agree. A good chunk of the tech trends in the last decade were indeed rent seeking, but silent revolution was happening in the transformers and the neural network architecture domain, which made today's products possible. And I'd wager that there are silent revolutions happening all across colossus that's the tech industry that will become apparent in the next decade. Jeff Bezos put it best during his recent interv…

That's easy for a billionaire to say, isn't it? Jeff Bezos is not exactly a reliable narrator here. His business practices are built on exploitation and externalising his costs (such as the massive environmental damage).
Post reply on HN