I'm not sure if that says a lot about ChatGPT or about founders.
Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder
51–60 of 307 posts
Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder
#52A little frightening really. I do love the fact that it produces a whole load of really rather plausible technical and sales pitch content, then when it comes to the AI generated logo and name it's called stuff like 'Cloaud ShiVore'. Makes it like a joke with a fantastic punchline.
Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder
#53Within the year I predict innumerable marketeers will type a sentence (“our blue baseball cap will help you get laid”), which is then expanded by some LLM into a full sales pitch, then compressed while being transmitted, then decompressed for display in a browser that automatically summarizes it into a single sentence (“advertiser wants you to buy hat”).
Perhaps it will be ad block and reader mode that boil out the puffery and filler.
Note that all the processing of expansion, compression, expansion, summarization, and its associated power consumption will, per Bastiat, add to the gdp.
Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder
#54No post body was provided.
Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder
#55siiiigh If this is GPT-3, what could GPT-4 do? Would GPT-n be the new 2^n MHz hype of the 90s?
Oh, that pattern of hype’s already been doing the rounds since GPT-3 first came out — people imagining GPT-4 and GPT-5 for short sci-fi stories about the late 2020s and early 2030s, asking a question that dates at least as far back as a few centuries BC with Jewish folklore about humans creating golems: can the work of our human hands and minds ever itself be a person? I’ve been playing with it. It’s very impressive,…
Its writing style is also trite, dry, verbose and tedious not to mention, the penchant for run-on sentences and blocks/walls of text.
I know that it's been tailored to output like this by its own creators to suit this medium of communication with the public, and it can likely to be tweaked to be less uptight and more laid-back in its verbal communications style, if necessary but I am not quite sold exactly on its potential to exceed human intellectual powers.
I mean, don't get me wrong it's still quite impressive and fascinating but not really superhuman, at least not yet.
Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder
#56I 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…
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 density would be much higher. This would cause the moon to become incredibly dense and heavy, with a gravitational pull that would be much stronger than it is currently.
If you were close to a compressed moon that was the size of a soccer ball, the gravitational force would be so strong that it would be impossible for you to escape. You would be pulled towards the moon with such force that you would be crushed by the intense pressure. In addition, the moon would be incredibly hot due to the pressure, so even if you were able to withstand the gravitational force, you would be burned by the intense heat. Overall, it would be extremely dangerous to be close to a compressed moon."
Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder
#57I 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…
It's almost more astonishing to me to see reactions like yours. I showed it to a friend and she too was unimpressed because it gave answers in her field (finance) that were "good, but sortof basic". So we have here a chat bot that pretty much passes for a human and some people react with "meh, it's not a genius". It makes me think of Tim Urbans chart: https://imgs.search.brave.com/YR7qt28AjhAeXSr_qvSmJubqIKJW5S...
If it is sold as an AI, people are unimpressed. It’s really not a genius.
If it is sold as a sophisticated general purpose chat bot (like you did), it’s incredibly impressive.
Context matters.
Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder
#58Soon we will see the guys who create these scammy fake Upwork profiles use this to generate the code for their clients and pocket the almost 100% profit margin!
What a time to be alive!
Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also not about how good ChatGPT is now. How good will ChatGPT be in 5 years? It's scary to imagine.
It’s also impossible to imagine correctly. Back in 2009, I was completely convinced that we’d be able to go into a car dealership and buy a brand new vehicle which had no steering wheel because the self-driving AI was just that good, within 10 years. Seemed reasonable at the time on the basis of the DARPA Grand Challenge results, but even 13 years later, it didn’t happen.
I think this is the crucial point, just as in all AI applications the way it deals with corner cases will decide its impact on the job market. And corner cases are usually where AI has consistently been performing badly.
Just as a reminder, after we had spectacular results on ImageNet, highly respected AI researchers were predicting the end of the radiologist occupation. Turns out that even when some state-of-the-art CV classification algorithm is used on any kind of scan, you still need a radiologist to look at the image basically in the same way as before.
If you write large-scale applications with the help of a system like ChatGPT you will still need to create accurate test coverage and an understanding of the problem that is essentially equivalent to that of the people writing the code themselves. Whether all of this would in the end actually lead to large enough productivity increases depends on how error-prone the AI generated code will be and given that it takes a lot more time to dig into unfamiliar codebases than those you've written yourself, I think it's anything but obvious that this will have a huge overall impact on the industry. But obviously I might be biased here, since I have a stake in the game.
Re: Using ChatGPT as a Co-Founder
#60I 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…
It's almost more astonishing to me to see reactions like yours. I showed it to a friend and she too was unimpressed because it gave answers in her field (finance) that were "good, but sortof basic". So we have here a chat bot that pretty much passes for a human and some people react with "meh, it's not a genius". It makes me think of Tim Urbans chart: https://imgs.search.brave.com/YR7qt28AjhAeXSr_qvSmJubqIKJW5S...
Totally, maybe we’re in the uncanny valley of AI intelligence and people are now over-reacting to small inaccuracies.