31–40 of 90 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"In addition, my plan guarantees every child a free kitten or puppy, along with the aforementioned immortality."
Sure, but a human could write that too. Surely the onus is on the investor to assess how realistic they think the founders' claims are.
The key question here isn’t so much whether GPT-4 beats the actual human decks as much as what it had to fabricate to do so. The humans are probably constrained by things like “reality” and “what their business has done in it” while GPT-4 could make up anything it wanted. A fair comparison would be to humans given the same prompt and told to invent whatever facts they wanted.
Amusingly, the article itself seemed more like a pitch than a scientific experiment.
The key question here isn’t so much whether GPT-4 beats the actual human decks as much as what it had to fabricate to do so. The humans are probably constrained by things like “reality” and “what their business has done in it” while GPT-4 could make up anything it wanted. A fair comparison would be to humans given the same prompt and told to invent whatever facts they wanted.
The humans are probably constrained by things like “reality” and “what their business has done in it” while GPT-4 could make up anything it wanted. You clearly know different founders than I do.
I find it weird to compare GPT-4 to not expert humans (which this did - they seemed to have just sampled pitch decks for funded companies). GPT-4 generally will beat non-experts. What you want to see is a comparison to say pitch deck consultants - it's also more useful to evaluate whether AI or a human should help you build one. This does suggest at minimum though that if you are a founder that GPT-4 will likely prov…
Just a nitpicking, but I would say GPT can easily beat untrained people. Clearly, GPT has already learned from all the good examples available on the internet, and it's nothing weird about that trained ones mostly outperform untrained ones.
The key question here isn’t so much whether GPT-4 beats the actual human decks as much as what it had to fabricate to do so. The humans are probably constrained by things like “reality” and “what their business has done in it” while GPT-4 could make up anything it wanted. A fair comparison would be to humans given the same prompt and told to invent whatever facts they wanted.
The key question here isn’t so much whether GPT-4 beats the actual human decks as much as what it had to fabricate to do so. The humans are probably constrained by things like “reality” and “what their business has done in it” while GPT-4 could make up anything it wanted. A fair comparison would be to humans given the same prompt and told to invent whatever facts they wanted.
Great point! Since they are not showing the decks, for all we know these GPT4 pitches may have been proposing they found a cure for cancer.
The key question here isn’t so much whether GPT-4 beats the actual human decks as much as what it had to fabricate to do so. The humans are probably constrained by things like “reality” and “what their business has done in it” while GPT-4 could make up anything it wanted. A fair comparison would be to humans given the same prompt and told to invent whatever facts they wanted.