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

ChatGPT Plugins

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 1001 posts

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#471

Post by jeremyjh »

tenpies wrote: post #409
dougmwne wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The really fun thing is that they are reasonably sure that GPT-4 can’t do any of those things and that there’s nothing to worry about, silly. So let’s keep building out this platform and expanding its API access until it’s threaded through everything. Then once GPT-5 passes the standard ethical review test, proceed with the model brain swap. …what do you mean it figured out how to cheat on the standard ethical review…

> The really fun thing is that they are reasonably sure that GPT-4 can’t do any of those things and that there’s nothing to worry about, silly. The best part is that even if we get a Skynet scenario, we'll probably have a huge number of humans and media that say that Skynet is just a conspiracy theory, even as the nukes wipe out the major cities. The Experts™ said so. You have to trust the Science™. If Skynet is real…

> If Skynet is really smart, it will generate media exploiting this blind obedience to authority that a huge number of humans have.

I’m far from sure that this is not already happening.

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#472

Post by 93po »

sebzim4500 wrote: post #464
arcadeparade wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's extraordinary, openai could probably licence this to Google right now and ask for 25% equity in return

There is absolutely no way that Google would go for that.

Completely agreed. Google is insanely rigid from what I've heard recently.

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#473

Post by 93po »

arrenv wrote: post #466
93po wrote: post #178

Holy shit. Ignore the silly third party plugins, the first party plugins for web browsing and code interpretation are massive game changers. Up to date information and performing original research on it is huge. As someone else said, Google is dead unless they massively shift in the next 6 months. No longer do I need to sift through pages of "12 best recipes for Thanksgiving" blog spam - OpenAI will do this for me an…

Also a product manager at the moment, previously ran an agency for 10 years, wondering what my next step will be.

Feel free to join here: https://old.reddit.com/r/aishift/

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#474

Post by nikcub »

now add a ?q= url param to chat.openai.com that fills and submits the prompt and I'm changing it to my default browser search provider instantly

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#475

Post by bobdosherman »

I used call point-and-click statistical software (like JMP) was the same as giving people who didn't know what they were doing a loaded gun. But democratizing access to advanced statistics...yada yada...who cares about asymptotic theory and identification and what not. Then R and Python and APIs that try to abstract as much as possible, and more loaded guns. But the talk of those loaded guns are really just phd-holders being obnoxious to some degree (but not completely wrong because stats can be misused...). But this really does seem like dumping a bunch of loaded guns all over the place. Nope

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#476

Post by pinkcan »

fudged71 wrote: post #292
CobrastanJorji wrote: post #110

I'm boggled at the plugin setup documentation. It's basically: 1. Define the API exactly with OpenAPI. 2. Write a couple of English sentences explaining what the API is for and what the methods do. 3. You're done, that's it, ChatGPT can figure out when and how to use it correctly now. Holy cow.

We're going to need a name for this type of integration

It's called ART - Automatic multi-step Reasoning and Tool-use

https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.09014

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#477

Post by koheripbal »

esclerofilo wrote: post #348
gitfan86 wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes you are right. But who was also right were the people that didn't want a highway built near their town because criminals could drive in from a nearby city in a stolen car commit crimes and get out of town before the police could find them. The world is going to be VERY different 3 years from now. Some of it will be bad, some of it will be good. But it is going to happen no matter what OpenAI does.

Highway inevitability is a fallacy. They could've built a railway.

A railway would have created a gov't/corporate monopoly on human transport.

Highways democratized the freedom of transportation.

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#478

Post by LightBug1 »

chatmasta wrote: post #353
mk_stjames wrote: post #277

I have some odd feelings about this. It took less than a year to go from "of course it isn't hooked up to the internet in any way, silly!" to "ok.... so we hooked up up to the internet..." First is your API calls, then your chatgpt-jailbreak-turns-into-a-bank-DDOS-attack, then your "today it somehow executed several hundred thousand threads of a python script that made perfectly timed trades at 8:31AM on the NYSE whi…

Pshhh... I think it's awesome. The faster we build the future, the better. What annoys me is this is just further evidence that their "AI Safety" is nothing but lip-service, when they're clearly moving fast and breaking things. Just the other day they had a bug where you could see the chat history of other users! (Which, btw, they're now claiming in a modal on login was due to a "bug in an open source library" - anyo…

[flagged]

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#479

Post by killthebuddha »

twobitshifter wrote: post #171
killthebuddha wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO you won't even need to build the app, you'll just provide a data model and some natural language descriptions of what you want your product to do.

That’s how this plugin system works already.

I don't think this is the case. You provide an API spec but you also have to provide the implementation of that API. ChatGPT is basically a concierge between your API and the user.

Re: ChatGPT Plugins

#480

Post by wizzwizz4 »

liamYC wrote: post #456
chatmasta wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When in human history have we ever intentionally not furthered technological progress? It's simply an unrealistic proposition, especially when the costs of doing it are so low that anyone with sufficient GPU power and knowledge of the latest research can get pretty close to the cutting edge. So the best we can hope for is that someone ethical is the first to advance that technological progress. I hope you wouldn't ad…

The luddites during the Industrial Revolution in England. Termed the phrase “the Luddite fallacy” the thinking that innovation would have lasting harmful effects on employment. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite

But the Luddites didn't… care about that? Like, at all? It wasn't employment they wanted, but wealth: the Industrial Revolution took people with a comfortable and sustainable lifestyle and place in society, and, through the power of smog and metal, turned them into disposable arms of the Machine, extracting the wealth generated thereby and giving it only to a scant few, who became rich enough to practically upend the existing class system.

The Luddites opposed injustice, not machines. They were “totally fine with machines”.

You might like Writings of the Luddites, edited and co-authored by Kevin Binfield.

Post reply on HN