Nailed every one. Some by saying not possible to answer but still.
Japan one seems wrong or at least wrongly explained. Japan controls Okinotorishima which is at 20 degrees north.
But still impressive deductive reasoning.
“Don Knuth Plays with ChatGPT” but with ChatGPT-4
41–50 of 141 posts
Re: “Don Knuth Plays with ChatGPT” but with ChatGPT-4
#42Most importantly, much better wonton recipe.
Re: “Don Knuth Plays with ChatGPT” but with ChatGPT-4
#43Interesting both completely whiff on the number of chapters in the Haj.
How would you get the correct number? I just did two Google searches and can't find the correct answer anywhere in the first page of results ("Novel The Haj chapters" and "Novel The Haj chapter list"). Even looking in the "look inside" preview on the Penguin Randomhouse website doesn't help because it apparently doesn't have a table of contents. I'm not surprised ChatGPT doesn't know and to me the only bad thing is t…
> the only bad thing is that it's hallucinating an answer instead of admitting it doesn't know.
Isn't this a fundamental issue?
Re: “Don Knuth Plays with ChatGPT” but with ChatGPT-4
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
Didn't nail the Rodgers and Hammerstein one; it still doesn't understand the reference to the ballet or that the "themes" in the question are musical.
I wouldn’t be surprised if half the Internet does not know that a ballet is part of a larger show.
Half??
Re: “Don Knuth Plays with ChatGPT” but with ChatGPT-4
#45[deleted]
Re: “Don Knuth Plays with ChatGPT” but with ChatGPT-4
#46Re: “Don Knuth Plays with ChatGPT” but with ChatGPT-4
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
It also fails to write a sentence with only five character words.
Still fairly impressive. Probably better than most people could do if given 60 seconds, but probably worse than most people if given 10 minutes.
That's wrong.
(An example of a sentence with only five letter words I wrote in less than 60 seconds)
Re: “Don Knuth Plays with ChatGPT” but with ChatGPT-4
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
Still fairly impressive. Probably better than most people could do if given 60 seconds, but probably worse than most people if given 10 minutes.
I don't think that is true.
I tried, this is what I came up with under significant time pressure:
Happy books sound great.
It was very difficult to think of a plural verb with 5 letters, and once I realized that was an issue, I was worried that I wouldn't have enough time to come up with a singular noun that would fit any of the singular verbs that I was considering (reads, seems).
Interestingly, this is the exact same mistake that ChatGPT made! It has "spell" -> "spells" which is a plurality / correctness of sentence mistake.
My sentence is technically correct and could be used plausibly in conversation: "What kind of books do you want to read?" "Happy books sound great."
But it's a pretty weak sentence. Being restricted from articles makes it very difficult to get agreement.
Re: “Don Knuth Plays with ChatGPT” but with ChatGPT-4
#49>> What is the most beautiful algorithm? > Quicksort Algorithm Definitive proof that AI must be stopped. Ranking quicksort as more elegant than heapsort?!
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I look no further than bubble sort -- it is simple enough I can recite it straight away should someone wake me up at modnight.
Re: “Don Knuth Plays with ChatGPT” but with ChatGPT-4
#50>> What is the most beautiful algorithm? > Quicksort Algorithm Definitive proof that AI must be stopped. Ranking quicksort as more elegant than heapsort?!
Well there is something rather satisfying about partitioning.