Shear Modulus posted:

The same business types who are going apeshit about chatgpt also gave adam neumann, elizabeth holmes, and sam bankman-fried zillions of dollars because they were able to spin a bunch of smart-sounding bullshit about something they knew nothing about. The job that chatgpt can replace right now is startup founder

Milo and POTUS posted:

Skynet did nothing wrong

Antonymous posted:

they're kinda a 1950s cyberpunk dystopia I am fully in my rights to post them here

redleader posted:

why do you think chatgpt is drawing anything from literary criticism etc for that stuff

Shear Modulus posted:

Why would i waste my precious human brainpower reading anything written by a robot

tokin opposition posted:

I suppose you don't have much to spare

Shear Modulus posted:

Why would i waste my precious human brainpower reading anything written by a robot

Al! posted:

i wobder what happens when you ask chatgpt to write a book report on f. scott fitzgerald's classic high school reading material novel the great gatsby and then run it through one of those plagairism detection sites

TDepressionEarl posted:

a lot of public domain books were digitized, gutenburg project and what not.

its free real estate

Vox Nihili posted:

Because it's part of its data set. Ask it about some literary criticism. Unless it's something incredibly obscure, it's probably been hoovered up.

redleader posted:

yeah, but it's not gonna be integrating that data into its response when you ask it to give you a judge judy episode in the style of william shakespeare

Laterite posted:

yeah it's not really good at generating anything "creative", yet. i've fed it some prompts to write reviews of a couple of our band's albums and the results are basically an absurd combination of both lifting wholesale from previous published reviews and straight making poo poo up ... band members, song names, etc. once it's able to process actual content, ie just feed it all of youtube and spotify, and conduct comparative analysis, that's when things will really go nutty.

Al! posted:

to be fair a lot has been written about your band, smash mouth

Laterite posted:

Shear Modulus posted:

they trained it on d&d posts

Laterite posted:

code:

produce a chord sequence, for the lyrics you wrote previously for the song called "smash mouth eat the eggs", in the style of pop-punk

Absolutely, here's a chord sequence for "Smash Mouth Eat the Eggs" in the style of pop-punk:

Verse:
G - D - Em - C

Chorus:
G - D - C - G
G - D - C

Bridge:
Am - C - G - D
Am - C - G - D

The pop-punk style often uses power chords (two-note chords) played with a distorted guitar sound, so you can experiment with playing the chords as power chords to give the song a more aggressive edge. The rhythm is usually fast-paced, so you can try playing the chords with a faster tempo and a more energetic strumming pattern. Good luck and have fun with it!

Laterite posted:

yeah it's not really good at generating anything "creative", yet. i've fed it some prompts to write reviews of a couple of our band's albums and the results are basically an absurd combination of both lifting wholesale from previous published reviews and straight making poo poo up ... band members, song names, etc. once it's able to process actual content, ie just feed it all of youtube and spotify, and conduct comparative analysis, that's when things will really go nutty.

thats not candy posted:

i ask gpt to give me some info on a topic, it will give me a fairly basic exec summary with some subtopic paragraphs that look credible at first glance. i ask it to expand with some detail on one of the subtopics and it will list a mix of facts plus a bunch of stuff i know is wrong. ill then ask it to clarify or expand on one of the wrong items and it just goes 'oops i mispoke, i dunno, i dont actually know anything im a language model.' okay great thanks friend

on second thought thats not much different than most people when you grill them on a topic or have them write anything detailed, so maybe it is alive

Tulip posted:

It's like making a sewage treatment plant where for every pound of poo water that goes in, 2 lbs of poo water come out. Like ok but why.

Al! posted:

i wobder what happens when you ask chatgpt to write a book report on f. scott fitzgerald's classic high school reading material novel the great gatsby and then run it through one of those plagairism detection sites

thats not candy posted:

i ask gpt to give me some info on a topic, it will give me a fairly basic exec summary with some subtopic paragraphs that look credible at first glance. i ask it to expand with some detail on one of the subtopics and it will list a mix of facts plus a bunch of stuff i know is wrong. ill then ask it to clarify or expand on one of the wrong items and it just goes 'oops i mispoke, i dunno, i dont actually know anything im a language model.' okay great thanks friend

on second thought thats not much different than most people when you grill them on a topic or have them write anything detailed, so maybe it is alive

ikanreed posted:

What most people need, rather than more creativity, is an editor.

Tulip posted:

Yeah the thing that I'm mystified about with ChatGPT is why people decided that semi-credible sounding mumbling was the thing that humans couldn't produce fast enough or in great enough quantities. It's like making a sewage treatment plant where for every pound of poo water that goes in, 2 lbs of poo water come out. Like ok but why.

Tulip posted:

So the thing is that "processing actual content" is not only not even close to anything ChatGPT does, none of the things it does are even trending in the direction of improving its ability to process content directly.

ChatGPT is just an autocomplete but writing longer sentences. It is basically a dictionary, a map of how often each word in the dictionary appears near each other word, and some checks to get it to write grammatically correct sentences. It's slightly more sophisticated than having a bag full of those one-word poetry magnets and just pulling them out.

ChatGPT cannot even reliably do arithmetic correctly. A thing that computers have been really good at for a while, and that is extremely easy to check for correctness. The line of research that involves checking for factual validity or meaning is entirely not the same track as what lead to or will come out of ChatGPT.

Yeah the thing that I'm mystified about with ChatGPT is why people decided that semi-credible sounding mumbling was the thing that humans couldn't produce fast enough or in great enough quantities. It's like making a sewage treatment plant where for every pound of poo water that goes in, 2 lbs of poo water come out. Like ok but why.

thats not candy posted:

Don't get me wrong, I still think the natural language model is pretty impressive regardless of its loose facts. I also like how if you ask it to provide sources for what its generating, it will throw out a bunch of dead links cause all its inputs were scraped years ago

NZAmoeba posted:

Dead links? Or it just responds with something that looks like a url, but it made it up?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_lAb8m9MpI

thats not candy posted:

Real links that have been moved or give a 404 cause the website changed since 2021.

uber_stoat posted:

robots churning out garbage to be "read" by other robots to generate impressions to make money for robots (or near as much). meanwhile, ecological collapse.

Cuttlefush posted:

i mean...