Paying it forward to mention this quote is actually from a speech praising Cesar. Watch this great clip from 1970 film
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0bi1PvXCbr8
We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
51–60 of 425 posts
Re: We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
#52the most irritating thing about this piece is the headline, a headline only a GPT could write.
Shakespeare's famous opening, "Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears; I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him" is the lead-in to a speech by Antony in which he very much praises Caesar and buries his enemies.
Re: We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
#53Hopefully people treat AIs like they treat other people on the internet, with disrespect and zero sympathy. We have been trained for this. Don't go soft on polite robots, that will be your undoing.
Re: We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
#54The thing about ChatGPT is its a bit of a mirror.
Its really really important that you ask it the right questions or it does tend to feed you some pretty average stuff.
and often its not just the right question, but the right question asked the right way.
Re: We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
#55If it generates what YOU think is BS or discriminatory, don't use it. /thread
While i find the downplaying of chatgpt to be a bit much, lets not go too far in the other direction.
ChatGPT is not suitable in applications where accuracy is more important than plausability, is i think the neutral way of putting the limitation.
So it can't write your PhD thesis for you and hasn't literally replaced himans in every field of endeavour. Big whoop. If that's the bar, it is a pretty high bar.
Re: We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
#56> However, as I spell out in my book, the concept of AGI is inseparable from the kind of hierarchy of intelligence that has underpinned ideas of innate supremacy since the days of empire and colonialism.
I think this line discredits the entire article, which was already a few obvious points blown at gale force into the reader’s ear.
Re: We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
#57> If it produces plausible articles or computer code it means the inevitable hallucinations are becoming harder to spot. How functional does the code have to be before it's no longer a hallucination? What if we are all not much more than only drawing "on the (admittedly vast) proportion of [our experiences] ingested at training time?
>How functional does the code have to be before it's no longer a hallucination? IDK, I haven't tried copilot, but does the code it generates work on the first try with no human intervention? >What if we are all not much more than only drawing "on the (admittedly vast) proportion of [our experiences] ingested at training time? ugh, this argument again. Despite the machine learning community using words such as "traini…
> does the code it generates work on the first try with no human intervention?
Sometimes, it certainly does. Does your code always work on the first try with no intervention?
Re: We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
#58I think ChatGTP is pretty amazing and worthy of all of its recent praise. However, is it a bit of a bullshit generator. It doesn’t know if it’s right or wrong or anything, it’s just word soup trained enough to where it’s usual correct in general knowledge areas. Here is a good example:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wALYKw59TqExbLiQJvql_sM7OhE...
Re: We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
#59> ChatGPT is, in technical terms, a 'bullshit generator'. This bs generator speeded up my coding by 10-20x. It's like a superpower... not talking about ChatGPT specifically but its stochastic parrot cousin (Copilot).
I’ve worked with people that have produced worse bullshit
Re: We come to bury ChatGPT, not to praise it
#60Ideologically-fixated writer. That aside, I wonder about any essay which uses the term "solutionise".