Except sometimes it does stuff like this:
(There's a guy named "Magnus Carlsen" who is arguably the best chess player of all time.)
I think it was trained on 🅱️eddit before they even sold them their 🅱️user's 🅱️ata
~~sad Bobby noises~~
I found ChatGPT to be indispensable in dealing with a nonsense homework assignment. I had to write a paper on a subject I knew about, but had to write it from a specific viewpoint and in far less time than would normally be allowed. I wrote up an outline, checked my sources, etc. Told ChatGPT to flesh it out. Read through the output, made some adjustments, and reprocessed. When I was happy with the result, I had it write a closing paragraph. Once again, read through the output, made adjustments, and reprocessed. Same with the opening paragraph.
Lastly, to remove all traces of AI, ran it all through QuillBot and had the input made more academic in some places, more casual in others.
Lesson: know your subject before attempting this. ChatGPT can be a time saver, but only if you already understand the output. Think of it as you would an advanced spelling and grammar checker. It's just another tool/ After all, if your boss told you to write something, and you could do it in a quarter of the expected time and still produce acceptable output, would they be upset?
That's probably the most useful way we can use language models.
But i do think there is also a use for finding key information (like a name) way quicker without the need to use keywords as we do in browsers.
Then it make any research using that information extremely easy if you got the keyword, and if that's the goal you also will confirm the validity of the answer in your process...
P.S. The first time i used chatGPT this way was very conclusive. I was looking for a philosophical point of view but didn't know at all if it even had a name, it gave it to me extremely quickly from just few lines of explaining (ontic structural realism for anyone interested).
My pretty clueless colleague wants a license for a programming AI. I tested some for a while and while they can certainly help ease tedious tasks or build a scaffold you can check and populate with logic, it's not useful as an artificial colleague writing for you. I really don't want her to work that way, because she doesn't know what she does and seldomly checks her own code. I'd prefer if she'd learn to code before delegating parts of it to an AI.
That's just it. You have to understand the output; otherwise you get very authoritative looking garbage.
I wrote some rudimentary Python code to do a job by brute force. On a whim, I asked ChatGPT to optimize the code. It did a pretty good job, but I still had to tweak it for my purpose.
As a guy who ran a video rental store for years, I can tell you this is more information than I’ve ever gotten in a media question.
Usually it’s the girl with the hair, or the guy with the weird eyes, who’s also in that movie where they save the dog.
Princess Leia
Benedict Cumberbatch
The Power of the Dog
Close! It was Alice Englert. 2/3 is not bad. I’d still consider the hire.
try it and see if chatGPT can find it
I like to use the VR app, Wander. Wandering all around the world in virtual reality using Google Street view. I keep the verbal "call and response" version of the ChatGPT app on my phone close by. As I wander around the planet, I ask the bot questions, really obscure ones, about all the weird stuff I see. It's like having a deeply nuanced travel companion with a deep book on tons of minutia. It makes the obscure become visible. And it's a lot of fun...
Yeah. ChatGPT works well when answering tip of tongue questions.
For example, I remember watching a movie back in the 80s where a man loves a mannequin that comes alive. I also remember a scene involving a hot air balloon at the end of the film. ChatGPT gave me the name right away.
Well don't leave us hanging
They're definitely talking about the Mannequin movies though only the first one came out in the 80s, with Mannequin 2: On the Move being released in 1991 (though I think it was actually more 80s than the one that released in the 80s, if that makes sense). I think the sequel is the one with the hot air balloon sequence at the end, though maybe they both had hot air balloons?
Well, I guess I know what I'm watching this afternoon.
Update: The hot air balloon scene is present only in Mannequin Two: On The Move.
It's also awesome if you need to write peer-reviews at work. I had it generate a list of bullet points from all questions and I just copied what I needed. 4 reviews done in under 20 minutes.
I also found it great for providing recommendations of things. Like describing a plot or movie you like and suggesting others that are similar. It doesn't even have to be an existing plot.
This is for strictly mildly interesting material. If it's too interesting, it doesn't belong. If it's not interesting, it doesn't belong.
This is obviously an objective criteria, so the mods are always right. Or maybe mildly right? Ahh.. what do we know?
Just post some stuff and don't spam.
