help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <>
Subject: Re: ChatGPT
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2023 08:54:59 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <u06043$19uam$> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <u054as$pra7$>

On 2023-03-31 01:00, Jeffrey R.Carter wrote:
> On 2023-03-30 23:49, Anatoly Chernyshev wrote:
>> What do you think?
> No doubt there are a large number of such programs in the training data. 
> If it had simply regurgitated one of those, at least the program would 
> have compiled. That it couldn't even do as good as that is not impressive.

Right. Fun would be adding qualifiers to the request. E.g. "in extended 
precision", "taking arguments from user input" etc. Parroting works up 
to some limit.

What I find interesting is that the whole swindle highlights that some 
human activities considered creative are in fact not. BTW, it repeats 
much earlier dethroning of playing chess as being indicative to human 
intellect. The machine easily beats us in chess.

Actually, it is the abilities to sort out garbage and pick up vegetables 
which make us intelligent! (:-))

Dmitry A. Kazakov

  reply	other threads:[~2023-03-31  6:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-03-30 21:49 ChatGPT Anatoly Chernyshev
2023-03-30 22:32 ` ChatGPT Jerry
2023-04-01 12:10   ` ChatGPT Hou Van Boere
2023-03-30 23:00 ` ChatGPT Jeffrey R.Carter
2023-03-31  6:54   ` Dmitry A. Kazakov [this message]
2023-03-31 11:04     ` ChatGPT magardner2010
2023-03-31 21:44     ` ChatGPT Anatoly Chernyshev
2023-04-01  7:39       ` ChatGPT Dmitry A. Kazakov
2023-04-07  1:51         ` ChatGPT Ken Burtch
replies disabled

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox