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

Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

atomic14.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 307 posts

Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

#291

Post by cesarvarela »

srge wrote: post #81
gsatic wrote: post #33

The only people whose minds this is "blowing" are people who have never had to build or maintain question answering systems. ChatGPT is like having a bunch of 8 year olds who know how to use Google hanging around. Sure you can use them, and their skills might surprise u every now and then, but that has nothing to do with how much time you are going to waste on the answers they will get wrong.

I want to be in this thread when it becomes the new infamous Dropbox thread

Let's not repeat the mistakes of the past and keep this thread focused on respectful and constructive discussion. Infamy is not something to strive for. Let's focus on the ideas and avoid personal attacks.

Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

#292

Post by attentive »

codingdave wrote: post #27

I could have said this on any ChatGPT post the last few days, but I'm simply not seeing the accuracy of it in such a way that anything is threatened. ChatGPT is a plausible idiot. It gets just enough right, saying just enough words, to sound plausible and authoritative to anyone who doesn't know the subject matter well. But it also gets enough wrong that you cannot rely on its accuracy, and if it is talking about a s…

not unlike some (co)founders then :)

Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

#293

Post by OhioMan2943 »

yesenadam wrote: post #132
srge wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want to be in this thread when it becomes the new infamous Dropbox thread

Oh please, comparing ChatGPT to Dropbox is like comparing a tiny little puddle to a vast ocean. Dropbox was a revolutionary product that changed the way we store and share files, while ChatGPT is just a mediocre language model with no real-world impact. You must be living under a rock if you think they're even in the same league. > Write a mocking reply to someone suggesting on Hacker News that someone else dismissin…

I picked it just before the end of the second sentence, 2/3 through. It's getting difficult to discern already. I wonder if it will deemphasise online forums.

Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

#294

Post by phist_mcgee »

yesenadam wrote: post #132
srge wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want to be in this thread when it becomes the new infamous Dropbox thread

Oh please, comparing ChatGPT to Dropbox is like comparing a tiny little puddle to a vast ocean. Dropbox was a revolutionary product that changed the way we store and share files, while ChatGPT is just a mediocre language model with no real-world impact. You must be living under a rock if you think they're even in the same league. > Write a mocking reply to someone suggesting on Hacker News that someone else dismissin…

Put me in the screencap.

Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

#295

Post by FormerBandmate »

abecedarius wrote: post #229
FormerBandmate wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ad begins with a shot of a crowded party, with people laughing and having a good time. The camera then focuses on a group of friends standing together, with one of them wearing our blue baseball cap. The person wearing the cap is shown smiling and laughing, looking confident and happy as they interact with their friends. The camera zooms in on the cap, highlighting its blue color and the logo on the front. As the…

So, was that from an AI?

Yeah

Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

#296

Post by sgt »

vincnetas wrote: post #110
sgt wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been asking it some popular science / physics related questions, like: "If the moon was compressed into the size of a soccer ball, would it be dangerous to be close to it ?" Its answer: "If the moon were compressed into the size of a soccer ball, it would be extremely dangerous to be close to it. The moon is made up of rock and other materials, and if it were compressed into a much smaller size, the resulting de…

But is this true though? Force of gravity does not depend on size of the object. It only depends on mass of two interacting objects. So no mater how you compress the the moon it's mass will still be the same, hence force of gravity will also stay the same? no?

I also asked my brother - a physicist. He confirms that it is correct.

Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

#297

Post by [deleted] »

littlestymaar wrote: post #170
dagss wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get your point, but here is a reason I am stunned: Until now, if you ask "what makes humans different from animals" many responses could be in the line of "generating art, poetry, music, synthesise ideas".. Well, now it seems somewhat clear that THAT part of human activity can be performend by something non-human. (There is still a lot more to humans of course; I agree with you on that point) Yes -- it is only reas…

> Until now, if you ask "what makes humans different from animals" many responses could be in the line of "generating art, poetry, music, synthesise ideas".. That's because we (as an agrarian society) have constructed an idea of “what a human is” in opposition to animals , but with the advance of AI maybe we'll realize that we are much closer to animals (especially other mammals) than we're comfortable to admit (and…

[deleted]

Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

#298

Post by tome »

allturtles wrote: post #219
10xDev wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People seem to be especially impressed by code generation like people were with chess because we associate those tasks with intelligence but they are constrained environments with well defined rules and a lot of data. Anyone who has followed the progress of RL knows that strong performance in such conditions does not mean it is comparable to human intelligence or that current architecture will scale even close to gen…

You are making what I think of as the standard "game move" of the AI skeptic. Chess-playing skill was considered a marker of intelligence, but then AI solved it, so it turns out it doesn't require "real" intelligence. 15 years later, neither does playing Jeopardy, it's "just" a clever Google search, that's not really intelligence. Now according to you, programming doesn't require real intelligence (and apparently nei…

What's wrong with updating our definition of "intelligence" based on new data? 500 years ago people presumably thought that lifting heavy objects required "muscles". Nowadays you can do it with metal and hydraulics. Surely robots must therefore have muscles. If you deny that then you're shifting the "muscles" goalposts?!

Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

#299

Post by worldsayshi »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #225
ilaksh wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For JavaScript they could build in a "test that code" step right into the web page. Or such a thing will be possible with the API.

Or automate the process even further; let the AI run the code, feed back the output (including errors), and ask "Does this output look correct? If not, please refine the code to fix any problems." Repeat until the AI says "LGTM".

Or just let train the model until it incorporates JavaScript semantics well. Then you don't need to maintain a bunch of integrations.

Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder

#300

Post by pydry »

indigochill wrote: post #122
pydry wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>you could say part of the problem is ChatGPT literally "believes" everything it reads online This is very much a problem with humans too.

To some extent, but people also have convictions about certain things, which GPT-based chatbots don't. The world would be very different if we could "fix" racists simply by asking them their favorite thing about people from other races (implying that there are admirable qualities, which GPT-3 plays along with but humans don't).

The GPT chatbot does have convictions they are just very context dependent and inconsistent.

It's not unusual for humans to behave this way either. E.g. "get your government hands off my medicare".

Post reply on HN