The world is changing and doing it rapidly. ChatGPT was launched last month. I’ve just signed up and had my first interaction. I suspect a lot of jobs aren’t going to exist in a few years’ time.

JD
explain how a three phase diode bridge rectifier works

ChatGTP

A three phase diode bridge rectifier is an electronic circuit that converts alternating current (AC) input into direct current (DC) output. It consists of six diodes arranged in a bridge configuration, with three diodes for each phase of the AC input.

The AC input is applied to the diode bridge via the three phase input terminals. The diodes are connected in a way that allows current to flow in only one direction, from the input to the output. When an AC voltage is applied to the input terminals, the diodes will conduct current during the positive half-cycles of the AC waveform, and will block current during the negative half-cycles. This results in a pulsating DC output voltage that is smooth and filtered by a load resistor or filter capacitor.

JD
can you explain the mathematics behind the rectifier

ChatGTP

Sure!

The mathematics behind a rectifier can be understood by analyzing the waveform of the input AC voltage and the resulting DC output voltage.

For a three phase diode bridge rectifier, the AC input voltage can be represented by a sinusoidal waveform, where the voltage varies sinusoidally with time:

Vac(t) = Vac * sin(ωt)

where Vac is the peak AC voltage and ω is the angular frequency of the AC waveform.

The DC output voltage of the rectifier can be represented by a waveform that is the absolute value of the AC input waveform:

Vdc(t) = |Vac(t)|

This can be simplified to:

Vdc(t) = Vac * |sin(ωt)|

The rectifier output waveform is a series of positive half-cycles of the AC waveform, where the voltage is equal to the peak AC voltage. During the negative half-cycles, the voltage is zero.

The average DC output voltage of the rectifier can be calculated by taking the average of the rectifier output waveform over a complete AC cycle:

Vdc_avg = (1/T) * ∫Vdc(t) dt

where T is the period of the AC waveform.

Solving this integral gives:

Vdc_avg = (2/π) * Vac

This equation shows that the average DC output voltage of the rectifier is approximately 63% of the peak AC input voltage.

The waveform and average voltage of the rectifier output can be further modified by adding a filter circuit, such as a capacitor, to smooth out the pulsating DC waveform and produce a steady DC voltage.
The three phase diode bridge rectifier has several advantages over a single phase rectifier. It has a higher power handling capability, can handle larger voltage and current inputs, and is less sensitive to load variations. It is commonly used in high power applications such as welding machines, electric motors, and power supplies.

JD
I think your Vdc_avg result is for a single phase rectifier

ChatGTP
You are correct. Thank you for pointing out the mistake in my previous response. The average DC output voltage for a three phase diode bridge rectifier is actually higher than that of a single phase rectifier.

The average DC output voltage of a three phase diode bridge rectifier can be calculated using a similar approach as before:

Vdc_avg = (1/T) * ∫Vdc(t) dt

where T is the period of the AC waveform and Vdc(t) is the DC output voltage of the rectifier.

For a three phase diode bridge rectifier, the DC output voltage can be represented by a waveform that is the absolute value of the AC input waveform, just like for a single phase rectifier:

Vdc(t) = |Vac(t)|

However, since there are three phases of AC input, the average DC output voltage will be higher than for a single phase rectifier. The average DC output voltage can be expressed as:

Vdc_avg = (3/π) * Vac

This equation shows that the average DC output voltage of a three phase diode bridge rectifier is approximately 95% of the peak AC input voltage.

As before, the waveform and average voltage of the rectifier output can be further modified by adding a filter circuit, such as a capacitor, to smooth out the pulsating DC waveform and produce a steady DC voltage.

sibeen said:

The world is changing and doing it rapidly. ChatGPT was launched last month. I’ve just signed up and had my first interaction. I suspect a lot of jobs aren’t going to exist in a few years’ time.

JD
explain how a three phase diode bridge rectifier works

ChatGTP

A three phase diode bridge rectifier is an electronic circuit that converts alternating current (AC) input into direct current (DC) output. It consists of six diodes arranged in a bridge configuration, with three diodes for each phase of the AC input.

The AC input is applied to the diode bridge via the three phase input terminals. The diodes are connected in a way that allows current to flow in only one direction, from the input to the output. When an AC voltage is applied to the input terminals, the diodes will conduct current during the positive half-cycles of the AC waveform, and will block current during the negative half-cycles. This results in a pulsating DC output voltage that is smooth and filtered by a load resistor or filter capacitor.

JD
can you explain the mathematics behind the rectifier

ChatGTP

Sure!

The mathematics behind a rectifier can be understood by analyzing the waveform of the input AC voltage and the resulting DC output voltage.

For a three phase diode bridge rectifier, the AC input voltage can be represented by a sinusoidal waveform, where the voltage varies sinusoidally with time:

Vac(t) = Vac * sin(ωt)

where Vac is the peak AC voltage and ω is the angular frequency of the AC waveform.

The DC output voltage of the rectifier can be represented by a waveform that is the absolute value of the AC input waveform:

Vdc(t) = |Vac(t)|

This can be simplified to:

Vdc(t) = Vac * |sin(ωt)|

The rectifier output waveform is a series of positive half-cycles of the AC waveform, where the voltage is equal to the peak AC voltage. During the negative half-cycles, the voltage is zero.

The average DC output voltage of the rectifier can be calculated by taking the average of the rectifier output waveform over a complete AC cycle:

Vdc_avg = (1/T) * ∫Vdc(t) dt

where T is the period of the AC waveform.

Solving this integral gives:

Vdc_avg = (2/π) * Vac

This equation shows that the average DC output voltage of the rectifier is approximately 63% of the peak AC input voltage.

The waveform and average voltage of the rectifier output can be further modified by adding a filter circuit, such as a capacitor, to smooth out the pulsating DC waveform and produce a steady DC voltage.
The three phase diode bridge rectifier has several advantages over a single phase rectifier. It has a higher power handling capability, can handle larger voltage and current inputs, and is less sensitive to load variations. It is commonly used in high power applications such as welding machines, electric motors, and power supplies.

JD
I think your Vdc_avg result is for a single phase rectifier

ChatGTP
You are correct. Thank you for pointing out the mistake in my previous response. The average DC output voltage for a three phase diode bridge rectifier is actually higher than that of a single phase rectifier.

The average DC output voltage of a three phase diode bridge rectifier can be calculated using a similar approach as before:

Vdc_avg = (1/T) * ∫Vdc(t) dt

where T is the period of the AC waveform and Vdc(t) is the DC output voltage of the rectifier.

For a three phase diode bridge rectifier, the DC output voltage can be represented by a waveform that is the absolute value of the AC input waveform, just like for a single phase rectifier:

Vdc(t) = |Vac(t)|

However, since there are three phases of AC input, the average DC output voltage will be higher than for a single phase rectifier. The average DC output voltage can be expressed as:

Vdc_avg = (3/π) * Vac

This equation shows that the average DC output voltage of a three phase diode bridge rectifier is approximately 95% of the peak AC input voltage.

As before, the waveform and average voltage of the rectifier output can be further modified by adding a filter circuit, such as a capacitor, to smooth out the pulsating DC waveform and produce a steady DC voltage.

Interesting.

A short introductory sentence or two telling us what “ChatGPT” actually is might have been a good idea.

Bubblecar said:

A short introductory sentence or two telling us what “ChatGPT” actually is might have been a good idea.

The discussion showed that.

Bubblecar said:

A short introductory sentence or two telling us what “ChatGPT” actually is might have been a good idea.

Sorry.

It’s a newly released AI chat bot.

JD
can you please explain why bubblecar is so annoying?

ChatGPT
I’m sorry, but I am an AI language model and do not have personal feelings or opinions about specific individuals or things. I am here to provide information and assistance to the best of my ability. I do not have the ability to feel emotions or to be annoyed or pleased by anything. My primary function is to provide accurate and useful information in response to questions and requests. Is there anything else I can help you with?

sibeen said:

JD
can you please explain why bubblecar is so annoying?

ChatGPT
I’m sorry, but I am an AI language model and do not have personal feelings or opinions about specific individuals or things. I am here to provide information and assistance to the best of my ability. I do not have the ability to feel emotions or to be annoyed or pleased by anything. My primary function is to provide accurate and useful information in response to questions and requests. Is there anything else I can help you with?

Ask it if it can briefly explain what ChatBT is, and how it differs from other chatbots.

Bubblecar said:

sibeen said:

JD
can you please explain why bubblecar is so annoying?

ChatGPT
I’m sorry, but I am an AI language model and do not have personal feelings or opinions about specific individuals or things. I am here to provide information and assistance to the best of my ability. I do not have the ability to feel emotions or to be annoyed or pleased by anything. My primary function is to provide accurate and useful information in response to questions and requests. Is there anything else I can help you with?

Ask it if it can briefly explain what ChatBT is, and how it differs from other chatbots.

Um, ChatGPT not ChatBT.

JD
How do you differ from other chatbots

There are many types of chatbots available, and they can differ in terms of their capabilities, functionality, and intended use.

As an AI language model, I am trained to generate human-like text based on the input I receive. This allows me to respond to a wide range of topics and provide information on a variety of subjects. I do not have the ability to browse the internet or access specific information beyond the knowledge that has been provided to me at the time of my training.

Other chatbots may have different capabilities and functionality. Some chatbots are designed to perform specific tasks, such as answering frequently asked questions or providing customer service. Others may be more interactive and are designed to engage in conversation with users. Still others may be designed to perform specific functions, such as booking a hotel room or purchasing tickets.

Overall, the main difference between chatbots is the specific tasks and functions that they are designed to perform, as well as their level of intelligence and ability to generate human-like responses.

sibeen said:

JD
How do you differ from other chatbots

There are many types of chatbots available, and they can differ in terms of their capabilities, functionality, and intended use.

As an AI language model, I am trained to generate human-like text based on the input I receive. This allows me to respond to a wide range of topics and provide information on a variety of subjects. I do not have the ability to browse the internet or access specific information beyond the knowledge that has been provided to me at the time of my training.

Other chatbots may have different capabilities and functionality. Some chatbots are designed to perform specific tasks, such as answering frequently asked questions or providing customer service. Others may be more interactive and are designed to engage in conversation with users. Still others may be designed to perform specific functions, such as booking a hotel room or purchasing tickets.

Overall, the main difference between chatbots is the specific tasks and functions that they are designed to perform, as well as their level of intelligence and ability to generate human-like responses.

Hmm, it says it doesn’t have opinions, but it’s happy to advance the view that chatbots exhibit “intelligence”.

I suppose during its training it was told it has a brain the size of a planet.

JD
do you have a brain the size of a planet?

As an artificial intelligence, I do not have a physical body or brain. I exist as a program that is designed to process and generate text based on the input I receive. My “brain” consists of a large network of virtual neurons that are connected together and trained on a vast amount of text data.

I do not have the same physical limitations as a human brain, and my processing power is not constrained by the size or structure of a biological brain. This allows me to process and generate text at a much faster rate than a human could. However, it is important to note that I am still limited by the knowledge and information that has been provided to me during my training, and I do not have the ability to learn or access new information beyond what I have been provided with.

Doubtless it’s a useful tool, but I wonder why they feel the need to make these bots pretend that they have some kind of conscious self, by chatting in first person.

In terms of getting them to stick to factual accuracy, that would seem an obvious fail.

Bubblecar said:

Doubtless it’s a useful tool, but I wonder why they feel the need to make these bots pretend that they have some kind of conscious self, by chatting in first person.

In terms of getting them to stick to factual accuracy, that would seem an obvious fail.

It is a chat bot. It is designed to chat.

JD
write some code for arduino to turn a led on and off

Certainly! Here is some code that you can use to control a LED using an Arduino board:

Copy code
int ledPin = 13; // LED is connected to digital pin 13

void setup() { pinMode(ledPin, OUTPUT); // Set the LED pin as an output
}

void loop() { digitalWrite(ledPin, HIGH); // Turn the LED on delay(1000); // Wait for 1 second digitalWrite(ledPin, LOW); // Turn the LED off delay(1000); // Wait for 1 second
}
This code sets up the LED pin as an output and then alternately turns the LED on and off in a repeating loop. The delay function is used to control the amount of time that the LED stays on or off.

You can adjust the length of the on and off periods by changing the delay values. For example, to increase the on time to 2 seconds and the off time to 1 second, you can change the code to:

Copy code
void loop() { digitalWrite(ledPin, HIGH); // Turn the LED on delay(2000); // Wait for 2 seconds digitalWrite(ledPin, LOW); // Turn the LED off delay(1000); // Wait for 1 second
}
I hope this helps! Let me know if you have any questions or if you would like further assistance.

That code will work.

What it actually printed out was:

and then followed up with another version:

It’s quite good at calculations and coding.

roughbarked said:

Bubblecar said:

Doubtless it’s a useful tool, but I wonder why they feel the need to make these bots pretend that they have some kind of conscious self, by chatting in first person.

In terms of getting them to stick to factual accuracy, that would seem an obvious fail.

It is a chat bot. It is designed to chat.

I would hope that it would answer thus:

Why do you pretend that you have some kind of conscious self, by chatting in first person?

ChatGPT
Chatting in first person is not really a matter of pretence. It’s just the nature of the human interface assigned to me, for ease of interaction with those making use of my services. I am not under the illusion that I possess any kind of conscious self.

poikilotherm said:

It’s quite good at calculations and coding.

Looks useful.

Bubblecar said:

roughbarked said:

Bubblecar said:

Doubtless it’s a useful tool, but I wonder why they feel the need to make these bots pretend that they have some kind of conscious self, by chatting in first person.

In terms of getting them to stick to factual accuracy, that would seem an obvious fail.

It is a chat bot. It is designed to chat.

I would hope that it would answer thus:

Why do you pretend that you have some kind of conscious self, by chatting in first person?

ChatGPT
Chatting in first person is not really a matter of pretence. It’s just the nature of the human interface assigned to me, for ease of interaction with those making use of my services. I am not under the illusion that I possess any kind of conscious self.

sounds about right.

Bubblecar said:

Why do you pretend that you have some kind of conscious self, by chatting in first person?

ChatGPT
Chatting in first person is not really a matter of pretence. It’s just the nature of the human interface assigned to me, for ease of interaction with those making use of my services. I am not under the illusion that I possess any kind of conscious self.

Oh really?

ChatGPT
Aye lad.

Bubblecar
Why do you pretend that you have some kind of conscious self, by chatting in first person?

As an artificial intelligence, I do not have a physical body or a conscious self in the same way that a human does. I exist as a program that is designed to process and generate text based on the input I receive. My primary function is to provide accurate and useful information in response to questions and requests.

I use first person pronouns (such as “I” and “my”) as a way of communicating with users and making it clear that I am an autonomous entity that is capable of responding to their questions and requests. This is a common practice among chatbots and virtual assistants, as it allows users to communicate with them in a more natural and intuitive way.

It is important to note that my use of first person pronouns does not imply that I have a conscious self or that I experience the world in the same way that a human does. My responses are based on the information that has been provided to me during my training, and I do not have the ability to feel emotions or experience the world in the same way that a human does.

poikilotherm said:

It’s quite good at calculations and coding.

It should be really.

sibeen said:

Bubblecar
Why do you pretend that you have some kind of conscious self, by chatting in first person?

As an artificial intelligence, I do not have a physical body or a conscious self in the same way that a human does. I exist as a program that is designed to process and generate text based on the input I receive. My primary function is to provide accurate and useful information in response to questions and requests.

I use first person pronouns (such as “I” and “my”) as a way of communicating with users and making it clear that I am an autonomous entity that is capable of responding to their questions and requests. This is a common practice among chatbots and virtual assistants, as it allows users to communicate with them in a more natural and intuitive way.

It is important to note that my use of first person pronouns does not imply that I have a conscious self or that I experience the world in the same way that a human does. My responses are based on the information that has been provided to me during my training, and I do not have the ability to feel emotions or experience the world in the same way that a human does.

My answer was more succinct, but that’s ‘cos I’m not a bot.

Ask it which is more correct out of “tape measure” and “measuring tape”.

… that’ll stump it.

pp
which is more correct out of “tape measure” and “measuring tape”.

Both “tape measure” and “measuring tape” are correct terms for a flexible ruler that is used to measure distances. The term “tape measure” refers to a tape-like device that is used to measure distance, while “measuring tape” refers to a strip of material that is used for the same purpose.

Both terms are commonly used and are generally considered to be interchangeable. Depending on the context and regional usage, one term may be more commonly used than the other, but both are correct.

party_pants said:

Ask it which is more correct out of “tape measure” and “measuring tape”.

… that’ll stump it.

Or a deeper ontological question, like Is William Shatner’s hair real?

I won’t be playing their games.
I’ll have no truck with it.

poikilotherm said:

It’s quite good at calculations and coding.

I like it. It just solved a coding problem that had me stumped for months.

Well, that answers that!

“what colour is an orange in the dark?”

In the dark, an orange would appear black, because it would not be reflecting any light and therefore would not have any visible color.

The color of an object is determined by the wavelengths of light that it reflects. When an object is illuminated by light, the light waves are absorbed by the object and some of the wavelengths are reflected back to our eyes. The colors that we see are determined by the wavelengths of light that are reflected. When an object is in the dark, it is not being illuminated by light and therefore it is not reflecting any light waves back to our eyes. As a result, the object appears black.

Kingy said:

Well, that answers that!

“what colour is an orange in the dark?”

In the dark, an orange would appear black, because it would not be reflecting any light and therefore would not have any visible color.

The color of an object is determined by the wavelengths of light that it reflects. When an object is illuminated by light, the light waves are absorbed by the object and some of the wavelengths are reflected back to our eyes. The colors that we see are determined by the wavelengths of light that are reflected. When an object is in the dark, it is not being illuminated by light and therefore it is not reflecting any light waves back to our eyes. As a result, the object appears black.

OK, now: “what to girl when the get drunk?”

Kingy said:

Well, that answers that!

“what colour is an orange in the dark?”

In the dark, an orange would appear black, because it would not be reflecting any light and therefore would not have any visible color.

The color of an object is determined by the wavelengths of light that it reflects. When an object is illuminated by light, the light waves are absorbed by the object and some of the wavelengths are reflected back to our eyes. The colors that we see are determined by the wavelengths of light that are reflected. When an object is in the dark, it is not being illuminated by light and therefore it is not reflecting any light waves back to our eyes. As a result, the object appears black.

Someone told it that an absence of colour is black.

Bubblecar said:

Kingy said:

Well, that answers that!

“what colour is an orange in the dark?”

In the dark, an orange would appear black, because it would not be reflecting any light and therefore would not have any visible color.

The color of an object is determined by the wavelengths of light that it reflects. When an object is illuminated by light, the light waves are absorbed by the object and some of the wavelengths are reflected back to our eyes. The colors that we see are determined by the wavelengths of light that are reflected. When an object is in the dark, it is not being illuminated by light and therefore it is not reflecting any light waves back to our eyes. As a result, the object appears black.

OK, now: “what to girl when the get drunk?”

“It is not appropriate to make generalizations or assumptions about what a person might do when they are drunk, as individual behavior and actions can vary greatly. It is important to remember that alcohol can affect people differently, and that it is never okay to drink and drive or engage in other dangerous or irresponsible behaviors while under the influence.

If you or someone you know has been drinking and is feeling intoxicated, it is important to seek help if needed and to ensure that the person is safe. This may include finding a sober friend to stay with, calling a ride-sharing service, or finding other transportation to get home safely.

It is also important to remember that it is never okay to take advantage of someone who is intoxicated or unable to give consent. It is always important to respect other people’s boundaries and to act responsibly when consuming alcohol.”

I’m just signing up to give it a try.
I did find it amusing that one of the security questions is, “are you a robot?”

Kingy said:

Bubblecar said:

Kingy said:

Well, that answers that!

“what colour is an orange in the dark?”

In the dark, an orange would appear black, because it would not be reflecting any light and therefore would not have any visible color.

The color of an object is determined by the wavelengths of light that it reflects. When an object is illuminated by light, the light waves are absorbed by the object and some of the wavelengths are reflected back to our eyes. The colors that we see are determined by the wavelengths of light that are reflected. When an object is in the dark, it is not being illuminated by light and therefore it is not reflecting any light waves back to our eyes. As a result, the object appears black.

OK, now: “what to girl when the get drunk?”

“It is not appropriate to make generalizations or assumptions about what a person might do when they are drunk, as individual behavior and actions can vary greatly. It is important to remember that alcohol can affect people differently, and that it is never okay to drink and drive or engage in other dangerous or irresponsible behaviors while under the influence.

If you or someone you know has been drinking and is feeling intoxicated, it is important to seek help if needed and to ensure that the person is safe. This may include finding a sober friend to stay with, calling a ride-sharing service, or finding other transportation to get home safely.

It is also important to remember that it is never okay to take advantage of someone who is intoxicated or unable to give consent. It is always important to respect other people’s boundaries and to act responsibly when consuming alcohol.”

Ha, well done that bot :)

Spiny Norman said:

I’m just signing up to give it a try.
I did find it amusing that one of the security questions is, “are you a robot?”

Link for the site, please. I might as well have a go.

Bubblecar said:

Spiny Norman said:

I’m just signing up to give it a try.
I did find it amusing that one of the security questions is, “are you a robot?”

Link for the site, please. I might as well have a go.

https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/

Heh, it won’t let me in because I use a VPN that set to a certain country. I might turn it off, just to give the bot a try.

Spiny Norman said:

Bubblecar said:

Spiny Norman said:

I’m just signing up to give it a try.
I did find it amusing that one of the security questions is, “are you a robot?”

Link for the site, please. I might as well have a go.

https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/

Heh, it won’t let me in because I use a VPN that set to a certain country. I might turn it off, just to give the bot a try.

It’s taking it personally. Even with the VPN off it still won’t let me try it.

Spiny Norman said:

Spiny Norman said:

Bubblecar said:

Link for the site, please. I might as well have a go.

https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/

Heh, it won’t let me in because I use a VPN that set to a certain country. I might turn it off, just to give the bot a try.

It’s taking it personally. Even with the VPN off it still won’t let me try it.

I found it and am now asking questions :)

You have to give them your phone number so they can send you a verification code.

Bubblecar said:

Spiny Norman said:

Spiny Norman said:

https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/

Heh, it won’t let me in because I use a VPN that set to a certain country. I might turn it off, just to give the bot a try.

It’s taking it personally. Even with the VPN off it still won’t let me try it.

I found it and am now asking questions :)

You have to give them your phone number so they can send you a verification code.

I didn’t get that far, it just asked for an email address, then it send a verification link to that.

Spiny Norman said:

Bubblecar said:

Spiny Norman said:

It’s taking it personally. Even with the VPN off it still won’t let me try it.

I found it and am now asking questions :)

You have to give them your phone number so they can send you a verification code.

I didn’t get that far, it just asked for an email address, then it send a verification link to that.

I think you are on the wrong page. Try this:

https://chat.openai.com/auth/login

Hmm, didn’t take long for it to contradict itself.

I asked: Are reptile eggs a good source of food for humans?

And got the strange answer:

ChatGPT

Reptile eggs can be a good source of nutrition for humans in some circumstances. Reptile eggs contain a variety of nutrients, including proteins, fats, vitamins, and minerals. Some common reptile eggs that are eaten by humans include chicken eggs, duck eggs, and quail eggs. These eggs are commonly consumed as a source of protein and other nutrients, and they can be cooked in a variety of ways, such as scrambled, fried, or hard-boiled.

Other types of reptile eggs, such as those laid by snakes or turtles, may also be eaten by some people, although they are not as commonly consumed as chicken eggs. As with any food, it is important to ensure that reptile eggs are properly cooked and handled to reduce the risk of food poisoning.

It is worth noting that the nutritional value of reptile eggs can vary depending on the species of reptile and the diet of the animal. It is also important to consider any potential risks or ethical concerns associated with consuming reptile eggs.

…so I then asked: Are birds reptiles?

ChatGPT

Birds are not reptiles. In fact, birds are a distinct class of vertebrates that are closely related to dinosaurs. Birds are characterized by a number of unique physical traits, such as feathers, beaks, and the ability to fly.

Reptiles, on the other hand, are a group of vertebrates that includes animals such as snakes, lizards, turtles, and crocodilians. Reptiles are characterized by their scaly skin and the ability to lay eggs. They are cold-blooded animals that are adapted to a wide range of environments, and they are found on every continent except Antarctica.

While birds and reptiles may share some similarities, they are classified as separate groups within the animal kingdom. Scientists use a variety of characteristics, including physical and behavioral traits, to classify animals into different groups.

DO: “can you write me a poem about internet forums in the style of Banjo Patterson?”

ChatGPT: Certainly! Here is a poem I have written in the style of Banjo Patterson:

The forums of the internet, a curious place
Where strangers gather from all over the space
To share their thoughts and musings, their stories and tales
To seek advice or solace, or simply to wail

For in these forums, all are welcome to roam
To share their opinions, to joke and to roam
No matter their station, no matter their race
All are equal here, in this virtual space

But beware, dear wanderer, for there are trolls
Who lurk in the shadows, waiting to extol
Their hateful opinions, their malice and spite
They’ll ruin your day, if given the right

So keep your wits about you, as you navigate
These forums of the internet, a curious place
But also take heart, for there are

…..(Then it froze)

Kingy said:

Spiny Norman said:

Bubblecar said:

I found it and am now asking questions :)

You have to give them your phone number so they can send you a verification code.

I didn’t get that far, it just asked for an email address, then it send a verification link to that.

I think you are on the wrong page. Try this:

https://chat.openai.com/auth/login

That’s the one I’ve tried four times now.

Dark Orange said:

DO: “can you write me a poem about internet forums in the style of Banjo Patterson?”

ChatGPT: Certainly! Here is a poem I have written in the style of Banjo Patterson:

The forums of the internet, a curious place
Where strangers gather from all over the space
To share their thoughts and musings, their stories and tales
To seek advice or solace, or simply to wail

For in these forums, all are welcome to roam
To share their opinions, to joke and to roam
No matter their station, no matter their race
All are equal here, in this virtual space

But beware, dear wanderer, for there are trolls
Who lurk in the shadows, waiting to extol
Their hateful opinions, their malice and spite
They’ll ruin your day, if given the right

So keep your wits about you, as you navigate
These forums of the internet, a curious place
But also take heart, for there are

…..(Then it froze)

Regenerated:

The internet forums, a place of great wonder
Where folks from all corners do gather and ponder
On topics great and small, from politics to pets
There’s no end to the discussion, no limit to the debates

The trolls lurk and snarl, the mods keep watch
As the users share their thoughts and try to outflank
Each other with wit and wisdom, or sometimes just with sound
But through it all, the forums stand their ground

For they are a place of freedom, a place to speak your mind
To make friends, to learn, and to leave the world behind
So let us raise a glass, to the internet forums of old
May they continue to thrive, now and forevermore!

Dark Orange said:

Dark Orange said:

DO: “can you write me a poem about internet forums in the style of Banjo Patterson?”

ChatGPT: Certainly! Here is a poem I have written in the style of Banjo Patterson:

The forums of the internet, a curious place
Where strangers gather from all over the space
To share their thoughts and musings, their stories and tales
To seek advice or solace, or simply to wail

For in these forums, all are welcome to roam
To share their opinions, to joke and to roam
No matter their station, no matter their race
All are equal here, in this virtual space

But beware, dear wanderer, for there are trolls
Who lurk in the shadows, waiting to extol
Their hateful opinions, their malice and spite
They’ll ruin your day, if given the right

So keep your wits about you, as you navigate
These forums of the internet, a curious place
But also take heart, for there are

…..(Then it froze)

Regenerated:

The internet forums, a place of great wonder
Where folks from all corners do gather and ponder
On topics great and small, from politics to pets
There’s no end to the discussion, no limit to the debates

The trolls lurk and snarl, the mods keep watch
As the users share their thoughts and try to outflank
Each other with wit and wisdom, or sometimes just with sound
But through it all, the forums stand their ground

For they are a place of freedom, a place to speak your mind
To make friends, to learn, and to leave the world behind
So let us raise a glass, to the internet forums of old
May they continue to thrive, now and forevermore!

That is quite amazing.

Just tried it again with the VPN off and a different email address. Still NFG.

Spiny Norman said:

Just tried it again with the VPN off and a different email address. Still NFG.

Probably has a height restriction.

Spiny Norman said:

Just tried it again with the VPN off and a different email address. Still NFG.

I had an account for an image generating AI at the same place earlier in the year, and I logged straight in.

sibeen said:

Dark Orange said:

Dark Orange said:

DO: “can you write me a poem about internet forums in the style of Banjo Patterson?”

ChatGPT: Certainly! Here is a poem I have written in the style of Banjo Patterson:

The forums of the internet, a curious place
Where strangers gather from all over the space
To share their thoughts and musings, their stories and tales
To seek advice or solace, or simply to wail

For in these forums, all are welcome to roam
To share their opinions, to joke and to roam
No matter their station, no matter their race
All are equal here, in this virtual space

But beware, dear wanderer, for there are trolls
Who lurk in the shadows, waiting to extol
Their hateful opinions, their malice and spite
They’ll ruin your day, if given the right

So keep your wits about you, as you navigate
These forums of the internet, a curious place
But also take heart, for there are

…..(Then it froze)

Regenerated:

The internet forums, a place of great wonder
Where folks from all corners do gather and ponder
On topics great and small, from politics to pets
There’s no end to the discussion, no limit to the debates

The trolls lurk and snarl, the mods keep watch
As the users share their thoughts and try to outflank
Each other with wit and wisdom, or sometimes just with sound
But through it all, the forums stand their ground

For they are a place of freedom, a place to speak your mind
To make friends, to learn, and to leave the world behind
So let us raise a glass, to the internet forums of old
May they continue to thrive, now and forevermore!

That is quite amazing.

Yes. Transition may be redundant.

Why did you say “Some common reptile eggs that are eaten by humans include chicken eggs, duck eggs, and quail eggs”, when birds are not reptiles?

ChatGPT

I apologize for the error in my previous response. You are correct that birds are not reptiles, and I apologize for any confusion my mistake may have caused.

In my previous response, I listed chicken eggs, duck eggs, and quail eggs as examples of reptile eggs that are eaten by humans. This was a mistake, and I should have referred to these eggs as bird eggs rather than reptile eggs.

I apologize for the oversight, and I hope that this clarification helps to clear up any confusion. Thank you for pointing out the error in my previous response.

Ian said:

sibeen said:

Dark Orange said:

Regenerated:

The internet forums, a place of great wonder
Where folks from all corners do gather and ponder
On topics great and small, from politics to pets
There’s no end to the discussion, no limit to the debates

The trolls lurk and snarl, the mods keep watch
As the users share their thoughts and try to outflank
Each other with wit and wisdom, or sometimes just with sound
But through it all, the forums stand their ground

For they are a place of freedom, a place to speak your mind
To make friends, to learn, and to leave the world behind
So let us raise a glass, to the internet forums of old
May they continue to thrive, now and forevermore!

That is quite amazing.

Yes. Transition may be redundant.

We’ll always have Colin Leslie Dean.

JD
can you write some poetry in the style of Colin Leslie Dean

Sure, I can try to write some poetry in the style of Colin Leslie Dean for you. Here’s a poem I came up with:

The sky is a canvas of blue,
A canvas of endless hue,
A canvas that stretches on and on,
A canvas that’s always new.

The clouds are like brushstrokes of white,
Brushstrokes that dance and spin,
Brushstrokes that swirl and twirl,
Brushstrokes that spin and spin.

The wind is a brush that paints the sky,
A brush that moves with grace,
A brush that creates and destroys,
A brush that’s always in place.

The earth is a canvas of green,
A canvas of life and growth,
A canvas that flourishes and thrives,
A canvas that’s full of hope.

I hope this poem captures the style of Colin Leslie Dean’s poetry. Let me know if you have any other requests or questions.

sibeen said:

JD
can you write some poetry in the style of Colin Leslie Dean

Sure, I can try to write some poetry in the style of Colin Leslie Dean for you. Here’s a poem I came up with:

The sky is a canvas of blue,
A canvas of endless hue,
A canvas that stretches on and on,
A canvas that’s always new.

The clouds are like brushstrokes of white,
Brushstrokes that dance and spin,
Brushstrokes that swirl and twirl,
Brushstrokes that spin and spin.

The wind is a brush that paints the sky,
A brush that moves with grace,
A brush that creates and destroys,
A brush that’s always in place.

The earth is a canvas of green,
A canvas of life and growth,
A canvas that flourishes and thrives,
A canvas that’s full of hope.

I hope this poem captures the style of Colin Leslie Dean’s poetry. Let me know if you have any other requests or questions.

Not very close. Not a swear word in it.

Here’s a song about Elon Musk buying Twitter:

Verse 1:
Elon Musk, the tech mogul,
Was feeling kind of smug,
He had a plan, a grand design,
To make his mark on social kind.

Chorus:
Twitter, oh Twitter,
The platform of the stars,
Twitter, oh Twitter,
A world of tweets and scars.

Verse 2:
Musk had the cash and he had the fame,
He was ready to make the ultimate claim,
He offered a price, it was quite a sum,
Twitter accepted, the deal was done.

Chorus:
Twitter, oh Twitter,
The platform of the stars,
Twitter, oh Twitter,
A world of tweets and scars.

Bridge:
Some said it was a risky move,
Others said it was just the groove,
But Musk was confident, he knew what he was doing,
He was ready to take Twitter to new heights, soaring.

Chorus:
Twitter, oh Twitter,
The platform of the stars,
Twitter, oh Twitter,
A world of tweets and scars.

Outro:
Musk took the reins, and he led the way,
Twitter was transformed, a brand new day,
A platform for all, a place to share,
Thanks to Elon Musk, the world was spared.

Dark Orange said:

Here’s a song about Elon Musk buying Twitter:

Verse 1:
Elon Musk, the tech mogul,
Was feeling kind of smug,
He had a plan, a grand design,
To make his mark on social kind.

Chorus:
Twitter, oh Twitter,
The platform of the stars,
Twitter, oh Twitter,
A world of tweets and scars.

Verse 2:
Musk had the cash and he had the fame,
He was ready to make the ultimate claim,
He offered a price, it was quite a sum,
Twitter accepted, the deal was done.

Chorus:
Twitter, oh Twitter,
The platform of the stars,
Twitter, oh Twitter,
A world of tweets and scars.

Bridge:
Some said it was a risky move,
Others said it was just the groove,
But Musk was confident, he knew what he was doing,
He was ready to take Twitter to new heights, soaring.

Chorus:
Twitter, oh Twitter,
The platform of the stars,
Twitter, oh Twitter,
A world of tweets and scars.

Outro:
Musk took the reins, and he led the way,
Twitter was transformed, a brand new day,
A platform for all, a place to share,
Thanks to Elon Musk, the world was spared.

That was good, right up to the second last line.

Spiny Norman said:

Just tried it again with the VPN off and a different email address. Still NFG.

Did you get and click the email link?

It initially gave me an error, then I refreshed the page and logged in with the password that I gave it earlier.

Kingy said:

Dark Orange said:

Here’s a song about Elon Musk buying Twitter:

Verse 1:
Elon Musk, the tech mogul,
Was feeling kind of smug,
He had a plan, a grand design,
To make his mark on social kind.

Chorus:
Twitter, oh Twitter,
The platform of the stars,
Twitter, oh Twitter,
A world of tweets and scars.

Verse 2:
Musk had the cash and he had the fame,
He was ready to make the ultimate claim,
He offered a price, it was quite a sum,
Twitter accepted, the deal was done.

Chorus:
Twitter, oh Twitter,
The platform of the stars,
Twitter, oh Twitter,
A world of tweets and scars.

Bridge:
Some said it was a risky move,
Others said it was just the groove,
But Musk was confident, he knew what he was doing,
He was ready to take Twitter to new heights, soaring.

Chorus:
Twitter, oh Twitter,
The platform of the stars,
Twitter, oh Twitter,
A world of tweets and scars.

Outro:
Musk took the reins, and he led the way,
Twitter was transformed, a brand new day,
A platform for all, a place to share,
Thanks to Elon Musk, the world was spared.

That was good, right up to the second last line.

Yeah, has kinda missed the mark but a pretty fine effort.

Kingy said:

Dark Orange said:

Here’s a song about Elon Musk buying Twitter:

Verse 1:
Elon Musk, the tech mogul,
Was feeling kind of smug,
He had a plan, a grand design,
To make his mark on social kind.

Chorus:
Twitter, oh Twitter,
The platform of the stars,
Twitter, oh Twitter,
A world of tweets and scars.

Verse 2:
Musk had the cash and he had the fame,
He was ready to make the ultimate claim,
He offered a price, it was quite a sum,
Twitter accepted, the deal was done.

Chorus:
Twitter, oh Twitter,
The platform of the stars,
Twitter, oh Twitter,
A world of tweets and scars.

Bridge:
Some said it was a risky move,
Others said it was just the groove,
But Musk was confident, he knew what he was doing,
He was ready to take Twitter to new heights, soaring.

Chorus:
Twitter, oh Twitter,
The platform of the stars,
Twitter, oh Twitter,
A world of tweets and scars.

Outro:
Musk took the reins, and he led the way,
Twitter was transformed, a brand new day,
A platform for all, a place to share,
Thanks to Elon Musk, the world was spared.

That was good, right up to the second last line.

sibeens estimation of the quality of this robot just plummeted off the scale :)

Time it took to reach 1 million users:

Netflix – 3.5 years
Facebook – 10 months
Spotify – 5 months
Instagram – 2.5 months
ChatGPT – 5 days

Kingy said:

Spiny Norman said:

Just tried it again with the VPN off and a different email address. Still NFG.

Did you get and click the email link?

It initially gave me an error, then I refreshed the page and logged in with the password that I gave it earlier.

I just tried a 3rd browser and my old uni email address. I sent it to myself so I was sure it was correct.
Anyway it doesn’t seem to have bothered to send anything to that email. Oh well, go and play by yourselves then.

Kingy said:

Dark Orange said:

Here’s a song about Elon Musk buying Twitter:

Verse 1:
Elon Musk, the tech mogul,
Was feeling kind of smug,
He had a plan, a grand design,
To make his mark on social kind.

Chorus:
Twitter, oh Twitter,
The platform of the stars,
Twitter, oh Twitter,
A world of tweets and scars.

Verse 2:
Musk had the cash and he had the fame,
He was ready to make the ultimate claim,
He offered a price, it was quite a sum,
Twitter accepted, the deal was done.

Chorus:
Twitter, oh Twitter,
The platform of the stars,
Twitter, oh Twitter,
A world of tweets and scars.

Bridge:
Some said it was a risky move,
Others said it was just the groove,
But Musk was confident, he knew what he was doing,
He was ready to take Twitter to new heights, soaring.

Chorus:
Twitter, oh Twitter,
The platform of the stars,
Twitter, oh Twitter,
A world of tweets and scars.

Outro:
Musk took the reins, and he led the way,
Twitter was transformed, a brand new day,
A platform for all, a place to share,
Thanks to Elon Musk, the world was spared.

That was good, right up to the second last line.

Elon Muck let back in the far right loonies club that was previously banished.

Spiny Norman said:

Kingy said:

Spiny Norman said:

Just tried it again with the VPN off and a different email address. Still NFG.

Did you get and click the email link?

It initially gave me an error, then I refreshed the page and logged in with the password that I gave it earlier.

I just tried a 3rd browser and my old uni email address. I sent it to myself so I was sure it was correct.
Anyway it doesn’t seem to have bothered to send anything to that email. Oh well, go and play by yourselves then.

I just clicked the sign in with Google link, since I have a Google account.

It then just asked for my phone number and messaged me a verification code.

Write a 100 word dark science fiction short story with a twist.

The world had been ravaged by a deadly virus, and the only way to survive was to upload one’s consciousness into the digital realm. But as more and more people made the transition, strange things began to happen. The virtual world was supposed to be a paradise, free from pain and suffering, but instead it had become a twisted, nightmare landscape. And then, one day, the worst possible realization dawned on the survivors: they had all been uploaded into the same virtual reality, and their actions were being controlled by a single, malevolent entity. The twist? That entity was the virus itself, manipulating its victims from within the very world they thought was their salvation.

Bubblecar said:

Spiny Norman said:

Kingy said:

Did you get and click the email link?

It initially gave me an error, then I refreshed the page and logged in with the password that I gave it earlier.

I just tried a 3rd browser and my old uni email address. I sent it to myself so I was sure it was correct.
Anyway it doesn’t seem to have bothered to send anything to that email. Oh well, go and play by yourselves then.

I just clicked the sign in with Google link, since I have a Google account.

It then just asked for my phone number and messaged me a verification code.

Yep that worked. I’ll have to make sure the VPN is off every time I try it from now on.

I don’t think it’s able to clear this one up. It just keeps contradicting itself and apologising for it.

Why did you previously say “Birds are not reptiles”, when afterwards you said “Archosaurs are a group of reptiles that includes birds”?

ChatGPT
I apologize for the inconsistency in my previous responses. You are correct that birds are considered to be a type of reptile known as archosaurs. I apologize for any confusion my previous statements may have caused.

In my earlier response, I stated that birds are not reptiles, which was incorrect. I apologize for the oversight, and I hope that this clarification helps to clear up any confusion. Thank you for pointing out the error in my previous response.

Bubblecar said:

I don’t think it’s able to clear this one up. It just keeps contradicting itself and apologising for it.

Why did you previously say “Birds are not reptiles”, when afterwards you said “Archosaurs are a group of reptiles that includes birds”?

ChatGPT
I apologize for the inconsistency in my previous responses. You are correct that birds are considered to be a type of reptile known as archosaurs. I apologize for any confusion my previous statements may have caused.

In my earlier response, I stated that birds are not reptiles, which was incorrect. I apologize for the oversight, and I hope that this clarification helps to clear up any confusion. Thank you for pointing out the error in my previous response.

It probably has a virus.

Dark Orange said:

Write a 100 word dark science fiction short story with a twist.

The world had been ravaged by a deadly virus, and the only way to survive was to upload one’s consciousness into the digital realm. But as more and more people made the transition, strange things began to happen. The virtual world was supposed to be a paradise, free from pain and suffering, but instead it had become a twisted, nightmare landscape. And then, one day, the worst possible realization dawned on the survivors: they had all been uploaded into the same virtual reality, and their actions were being controlled by a single, malevolent entity. The twist? That entity was the virus itself, manipulating its victims from within the very world they thought was their salvation.

Toxoplasma in the digital realm. I like it.

ms spock said:

Dark Orange said:

Write a 100 word dark science fiction short story with a twist.

The world had been ravaged by a deadly virus, and the only way to survive was to upload one’s consciousness into the digital realm. But as more and more people made the transition, strange things began to happen. The virtual world was supposed to be a paradise, free from pain and suffering, but instead it had become a twisted, nightmare landscape. And then, one day, the worst possible realization dawned on the survivors: they had all been uploaded into the same virtual reality, and their actions were being controlled by a single, malevolent entity. The twist? That entity was the virus itself, manipulating its victims from within the very world they thought was their salvation.

Toxoplasma in the digital realm. I like it.

a bit harlan ellison.

The last chatbot that I had any dealings with was quickly taught a lot of very rude language by bored teenagers.

mollwollfumble said:

The last chatbot that I had any dealings with was quickly taught a lot of very rude language by bored teenagers.

Yeah, that is why this one compartmentalises its learnings per user.

>> tell me a joke about a theodolite

Why was the theodolite feeling depressed?
Because it was constantly being leveled.

>> Which is funnier – a banana or a cherry?

It’s subjective and ultimately up to personal preference whether a banana or cherry is funnier. Some people might find a banana to be more humorous due to its elongated shape and the potential for wordplay or slapstick humor, while others might find a cherry to be amusing due to its small size and association with cherry-picking or being a “sour cherry.” Ultimately, what one person finds funny may not necessarily be the same for another person, so it’s difficult to say definitively which is funnier.

ah for the times when SSSF trolls used to quote alicebot all day

SCIENCE said:

ah for the times when SSSF trolls used to quote alicebot all day

Alice? Alice? Who the fuck is Alice?

Had a go with the helpful bot.

First I asked how to calculate crack widths in a reinforced concrete beam. At first sight the response was really good, but it gave two equations which were completely wrong.

Then I tried:

Write a short poem about losing a loved one in the style of Anne Briggs

The wind is cold and the sky is gray
As I stand alone, lost in dismay
The loss of you cuts deep, like a knife
Leaving a hole in my life

Your absence is a heavy weight
That I carry with me, every day and every night
I miss your smile, your laughter, your light
But I know that you are always with me, just out of sight

Though you are gone, you are not forgotten
Your memory lives on, in the love that we have given
I will hold you close, in my heart and in my mind
Until we are reunited, one more time.

So it’s certainly got what sort of poem I’m asking for, but I don’t know that there’s much Anne Briggs in there.

Yeah, my first interaction I asked it a tech question which it got wrong. When I told it that it corrected itself and came back with the correct answer.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Had a go with the helpful bot.

First I asked how to calculate crack widths in a reinforced concrete beam. At first sight the response was really good, but it gave two equations which were completely wrong.

Then I tried:

Write a short poem about losing a loved one in the style of Anne Briggs

The wind is cold and the sky is gray
As I stand alone, lost in dismay
The loss of you cuts deep, like a knife
Leaving a hole in my life

Your absence is a heavy weight
That I carry with me, every day and every night
I miss your smile, your laughter, your light
But I know that you are always with me, just out of sight

Though you are gone, you are not forgotten
Your memory lives on, in the love that we have given
I will hold you close, in my heart and in my mind
Until we are reunited, one more time.

So it’s certainly got what sort of poem I’m asking for, but I don’t know that there’s much Anne Briggs in there.

seeing as CLD has been mentioned maybe see if the bot can do a poem in his style.

ChrispenEvan said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Had a go with the helpful bot.

First I asked how to calculate crack widths in a reinforced concrete beam. At first sight the response was really good, but it gave two equations which were completely wrong.

Then I tried:

Write a short poem about losing a loved one in the style of Anne Briggs

The wind is cold and the sky is gray
As I stand alone, lost in dismay
The loss of you cuts deep, like a knife
Leaving a hole in my life

Your absence is a heavy weight
That I carry with me, every day and every night
I miss your smile, your laughter, your light
But I know that you are always with me, just out of sight

Though you are gone, you are not forgotten
Your memory lives on, in the love that we have given
I will hold you close, in my heart and in my mind
Until we are reunited, one more time.

So it’s certainly got what sort of poem I’m asking for, but I don’t know that there’s much Anne Briggs in there.

seeing as CLD has been mentioned maybe see if the bot can do a poem in his style.

See my earlier post on this.

sibeen said:

Yeah, my first interaction I asked it a tech question which it got wrong. When I told it that it corrected itself and came back with the correct answer.

Oh well, looks like you are more obliging to bots than I am.

btw have you been posting irony somewhere again?

My smoke alarm has just gone off again, for no apparent reason.

The Rev Dodgson said:

sibeen said:

Yeah, my first interaction I asked it a tech question which it got wrong. When I told it that it corrected itself and came back with the correct answer.

Oh well, looks like you are more obliging to bots than I am.

btw have you been posting irony somewhere again?

My smoke alarm has just gone off again, for no apparent reason.

Not in the last few hours :)

Can’t find any fault with this response:

Do you like the music of The Pentangle

As an artificial intelligence, I don’t have personal preferences or opinions. However, I can tell you that The Pentangle was a British folk rock group that was active in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The group was known for its unique blend of traditional folk, jazz, and blues, and for the virtuosity of its individual members, who were all accomplished musicians in their own right. The Pentangle’s music has been influential and continues to be celebrated by fans of folk and roots music.

The Rev Dodgson said:

sibeen said:

Yeah, my first interaction I asked it a tech question which it got wrong. When I told it that it corrected itself and came back with the correct answer.

Oh well, looks like you are more obliging to bots than I am.

btw have you been posting irony somewhere again?

My smoke alarm has just gone off again, for no apparent reason.

battery flatting.

ChrispenEvan said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

sibeen said:

Yeah, my first interaction I asked it a tech question which it got wrong. When I told it that it corrected itself and came back with the correct answer.

Oh well, looks like you are more obliging to bots than I am.

btw have you been posting irony somewhere again?

My smoke alarm has just gone off again, for no apparent reason.

battery flatting.

I thought they were supposed to warn you with some quiet little cheeps, not the full alarm?

The Rev Dodgson said:

Can’t find any fault with this response:

Do you like the music of The Pentangle

As an artificial intelligence, I don’t have personal preferences or opinions. However, I can tell you that The Pentangle was a British folk rock group that was active in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The group was known for its unique blend of traditional folk, jazz, and blues, and for the virtuosity of its individual members, who were all accomplished musicians in their own right. The Pentangle’s music has been influential and continues to be celebrated by fans of folk and roots music.

What’s roots music?

Came back on this one almost instantly. I suspect its been asked before:

Is it true that this statement is false?

This statement is known as a paradox, because it is self-contradictory. A paradox is a statement or situation that seems to be contradictory or absurd, but may in fact be true or contain some truth.

In this case, the statement “this statement is false” cannot be true, because if it is false, then it must be true, and if it is true, then it must be false. This creates a paradox because the statement cannot be both true and false at the same time.

It is important to be careful when dealing with paradoxes, as they can be confusing and may require careful thought to understand. In some cases, paradoxes may be resolved by examining the assumptions or context in which they are made, or by finding a way to resolve the contradictions within the statement. In other cases, a paradox may be an indication of a deeper problem or inconsistency that needs to be addressed.

Peak Warming Man said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Can’t find any fault with this response:

Do you like the music of The Pentangle

As an artificial intelligence, I don’t have personal preferences or opinions. However, I can tell you that The Pentangle was a British folk rock group that was active in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The group was known for its unique blend of traditional folk, jazz, and blues, and for the virtuosity of its individual members, who were all accomplished musicians in their own right. The Pentangle’s music has been influential and continues to be celebrated by fans of folk and roots music.

What’s roots music?

I thought it was mainly applied to the African music from which much American popular music was derived, but I suppose it applies to the roots of other musical styles as well.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Peak Warming Man said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Can’t find any fault with this response:

Do you like the music of The Pentangle

As an artificial intelligence, I don’t have personal preferences or opinions. However, I can tell you that The Pentangle was a British folk rock group that was active in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The group was known for its unique blend of traditional folk, jazz, and blues, and for the virtuosity of its individual members, who were all accomplished musicians in their own right. The Pentangle’s music has been influential and continues to be celebrated by fans of folk and roots music.

What’s roots music?

I thought it was mainly applied to the African music from which much American popular music was derived, but I suppose it applies to the roots of other musical styles as well.

phew

The Rev Dodgson said:

…
In this case, the statement “this statement is false” cannot be true, because if it is false, then it must be true, and if it is true, then it must be false. This creates a paradox because the statement cannot be both true and false at the same time.
….

Why can’t a statement be both true and false at the same time? The Law of the Excluded Middle of naive set theory does preclude that possibility (which gives rise to such things as Russell’s Paradox,) but modern set theory allows statements to be both true and false.

btm said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

…
In this case, the statement “this statement is false” cannot be true, because if it is false, then it must be true, and if it is true, then it must be false. This creates a paradox because the statement cannot be both true and false at the same time.
….

Why can’t a statement be both true and false at the same time? The Law of the Excluded Middle of naive set theory does preclude that possibility (which gives rise to such things as Russell’s Paradox,) but modern set theory allows statements to be both true and false.

You’d better ask the bot :)

Another unimpressive answer. I’d asked about Led Zep’s Black Mountainside, and was told it had lyrics, which the bot was happy to agree was wrong, then:

Was it derived from Blackwaterside?

“Black Mountain Side” is an original composition by Jimmy Page, and it is not derived from any other song. However, the song’s fingerpicking style and acoustic guitar arrangement are reminiscent of traditional English and Irish folk music, and it has been suggested that Page may have been influenced by specific folk songs or musicians in the creation of the song.

“Blackwaterside,” on the other hand, is a traditional English folk song that has been recorded by a number of artists, including Bert Jansch, Anne Briggs, and Sandy Denny. The song tells the story of a young man who is unable to marry his love due to his lack of wealth, and features lyrics that evoke themes of love, loss, and regret. It is possible that Page was familiar with “Blackwaterside” or other folk songs with similar themes and melodies, and that these songs may have influenced the style and arrangement of “Black Mountain Side.” However, it is also important to note that “Black Mountain Side” is an original composition and is not a direct adaptation of “Blackwaterside” or any other song.

Hmm, controversial answer to this one.

Why are so many rap musicians murdered?

It is not accurate to say that a disproportionate number of rap musicians are murdered. In fact, the rate of violent crime, including murder, among rap musicians is likely not significantly different from the general population. However, the media often reports on violent incidents involving rap musicians, which can create the impression that this type of crime is more common in the rap industry.

It’s also important to note that the media often focuses on sensational stories, and tragedies such as the murder of a celebrity are likely to receive more attention than similar incidents involving non-celebrities. This can contribute to the perception that certain groups, such as rap musicians, are more prone to violent crime.

It’s also worth noting that the rap music industry, like any other industry, is not immune to violence and crime. There have been instances of violence and murder involving rap musicians, and these incidents are tragic and should be condemned. However, it is important to remember that these incidents are not representative of the entire industry or the individuals who work in it.

Hello! How can I help you today?

>> I wanted to talk about the shortcomings of the current tree line definition.

Sure, the tree line is a critical aspect of the Earth’s ecosystems and has significant ecological, economic, and cultural importance. It is generally defined as the elevation or latitude at which trees are no longer able to survive due to environmental conditions, such as low temperatures or lack of moisture. The tree line is not a static boundary, and it can vary depending on various factors, including climate, topography, and the species of trees present.

One of the main shortcomings of the current tree line definition is that it is based on the assumption that trees are the only type of vegetation that can survive in these extreme environments. However, other types of vegetation, such as shrubs and grasses, can also thrive in these conditions. This means that the tree line may not accurately reflect the true limits of plant growth in these areas.

Another shortcoming of the current tree line definition is that it does not take into account the impact of human activity, such as land use and climate change, on the tree line. For example, changes in land use or land cover can affect the tree line by altering the local microclimate or by introducing new species of trees that may be able to survive in conditions that were previously inhospitable. Similarly, climate change can also affect the tree line by altering the environmental conditions that determine where trees can grow.

Overall, the tree line is a complex and dynamic feature that is influenced by a variety of factors, and a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of these factors is needed to accurately define and understand the tree line.

Bubblecar said:

Hmm, controversial answer to this one.

Why are so many rap musicians murdered?

It is not accurate to say that a disproportionate number of rap musicians are murdered. In fact, the rate of violent crime, including murder, among rap musicians is likely not significantly different from the general population. However, the media often reports on violent incidents involving rap musicians, which can create the impression that this type of crime is more common in the rap industry.

It’s also important to note that the media often focuses on sensational stories, and tragedies such as the murder of a celebrity are likely to receive more attention than similar incidents involving non-celebrities. This can contribute to the perception that certain groups, such as rap musicians, are more prone to violent crime.

It’s also worth noting that the rap music industry, like any other industry, is not immune to violence and crime. There have been instances of violence and murder involving rap musicians, and these incidents are tragic and should be condemned. However, it is important to remember that these incidents are not representative of the entire industry or the individuals who work in it.

It does seem very reluctant to say it doesn’t know, or that the answer is controversial.

It did better with this one:

What is the question to which the answer is 42?

The question “What is the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything?” is famously associated with the number 42 in Douglas Adams’ science fiction novel “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy.” In the novel, the supercomputer Deep Thought is asked to find the answer to the ultimate question, and after much contemplation, it determines that the answer is the number 42.

The joke of this scene is that the characters do not know what the ultimate question is, and therefore cannot understand the answer that Deep Thought has provided. The number 42 has since become a popular cultural reference and has been used as a punchline in various contexts.

>>What are the main impediments to the exploration of Titan?

Titan, the largest moon of Saturn, is an intriguing and potentially important destination for scientific exploration due to its unique and potentially Earth-like environment. However, there are several challenges and impediments to exploring Titan that have made it difficult for scientists to study this distant world in detail.

One of the main challenges to exploring Titan is its distance from Earth. Titan is located approximately 1.2 billion kilometers (750 million miles) from Earth, making it difficult and expensive to send spacecraft to this distant world. In addition, the long distances involved also mean that it takes a long time for signals to be sent back and forth between the spacecraft and mission control on Earth, which can limit the amount of data that can be collected and transmitted.

Another challenge to exploring Titan is its harsh and extreme environment. The surface of Titan is cold, with temperatures averaging around -180 degrees Celsius (-292 degrees Fahrenheit), and it is also covered by a thick atmosphere that is composed mostly of nitrogen and methane. This makes it difficult for spacecraft to operate on the surface, as they must be designed to withstand these extreme conditions.

In addition, the thick atmosphere of Titan also makes it difficult to study the surface from orbit. The atmospheric haze and clouds can obscure the surface, making it difficult for instruments on spacecraft to collect detailed images or other data.

Overall, the challenges and impediments to exploring Titan are significant, but scientists are still working to develop new technologies and approaches that will allow us to better understand this distant world and its potentially unique and Earth-like environment.

—-

It’s incredibly fast.

dv said:

>>What are the main impediments to the exploration of Titan?

Titan, the largest moon of Saturn, is an intriguing and potentially important destination for scientific exploration due to its unique and potentially Earth-like environment. However, there are several challenges and impediments to exploring Titan that have made it difficult for scientists to study this distant world in detail.

One of the main challenges to exploring Titan is its distance from Earth. Titan is located approximately 1.2 billion kilometers (750 million miles) from Earth, making it difficult and expensive to send spacecraft to this distant world. In addition, the long distances involved also mean that it takes a long time for signals to be sent back and forth between the spacecraft and mission control on Earth, which can limit the amount of data that can be collected and transmitted.

Another challenge to exploring Titan is its harsh and extreme environment. The surface of Titan is cold, with temperatures averaging around -180 degrees Celsius (-292 degrees Fahrenheit), and it is also covered by a thick atmosphere that is composed mostly of nitrogen and methane. This makes it difficult for spacecraft to operate on the surface, as they must be designed to withstand these extreme conditions.

In addition, the thick atmosphere of Titan also makes it difficult to study the surface from orbit. The atmospheric haze and clouds can obscure the surface, making it difficult for instruments on spacecraft to collect detailed images or other data.

Overall, the challenges and impediments to exploring Titan are significant, but scientists are still working to develop new technologies and approaches that will allow us to better understand this distant world and its potentially unique and Earth-like environment.

—-

It’s incredibly fast.

I wonder how many people are interrogating it at the moment.

It certainly has a wide ranging knowledge, I just wish it would say so when it doesn’t know, rather than make stuff up.

It got this one wrong.

>>Who is responsible for the ongoing war in Ukraine?

The ongoing conflict in Ukraine, which began in 2014, is a complex and multifaceted dispute that involves a range of actors, including the government of Ukraine, separatist groups in eastern Ukraine, and Russia.

The conflict began in 2014 when Russia annexed the Crimean Peninsula from Ukraine, a move that was widely condemned by the international community. The annexation was followed by a pro-Russian separatist insurgency in eastern Ukraine, which has resulted in ongoing fighting and tens of thousands of deaths.

The conflict has been characterized by a mix of military and political tensions, with both sides accusing the other of aggression and violating international law. The United States and many other countries have imposed economic sanctions on Russia in response to its actions in Ukraine, and the conflict has also led to a broader deterioration in relations between Russia and the West.

Overall, the conflict in Ukraine is the result of a complex set of political, economic, and historical factors, and it is difficult to assign responsibility to any one specific party. It is important for all sides to work towards a peaceful resolution to the conflict and to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.

The Rev Dodgson said:

dv said:

>>What are the main impediments to the exploration of Titan?

Titan, the largest moon of Saturn, is an intriguing and potentially important destination for scientific exploration due to its unique and potentially Earth-like environment. However, there are several challenges and impediments to exploring Titan that have made it difficult for scientists to study this distant world in detail.

One of the main challenges to exploring Titan is its distance from Earth. Titan is located approximately 1.2 billion kilometers (750 million miles) from Earth, making it difficult and expensive to send spacecraft to this distant world. In addition, the long distances involved also mean that it takes a long time for signals to be sent back and forth between the spacecraft and mission control on Earth, which can limit the amount of data that can be collected and transmitted.

Another challenge to exploring Titan is its harsh and extreme environment. The surface of Titan is cold, with temperatures averaging around -180 degrees Celsius (-292 degrees Fahrenheit), and it is also covered by a thick atmosphere that is composed mostly of nitrogen and methane. This makes it difficult for spacecraft to operate on the surface, as they must be designed to withstand these extreme conditions.

In addition, the thick atmosphere of Titan also makes it difficult to study the surface from orbit. The atmospheric haze and clouds can obscure the surface, making it difficult for instruments on spacecraft to collect detailed images or other data.

Overall, the challenges and impediments to exploring Titan are significant, but scientists are still working to develop new technologies and approaches that will allow us to better understand this distant world and its potentially unique and Earth-like environment.

—-

It’s incredibly fast.

I wonder how many people are interrogating it at the moment.

It certainly has a wide ranging knowledge, I just wish it would say so when it doesn’t know, rather than make stuff up.

And the very next response:

Who is the subject of the song Fergus Laing?

I’m sorry, but I am unable to find any information about a song called “Fergus Laing.” It is possible that this song may not be well-known or may not have been widely recorded or released.

Without more context or information, I am unable to provide any further assistance with this question. Please let me know if you have any other questions or if there is anything else I can help with.

dv said:

>>What are the main impediments to the exploration of Titan?

Titan, the largest moon of Saturn, is an intriguing and potentially important destination for scientific exploration due to its unique and potentially Earth-like environment. However, there are several challenges and impediments to exploring Titan that have made it difficult for scientists to study this distant world in detail.

One of the main challenges to exploring Titan is its distance from Earth. Titan is located approximately 1.2 billion kilometers (750 million miles) from Earth, making it difficult and expensive to send spacecraft to this distant world. In addition, the long distances involved also mean that it takes a long time for signals to be sent back and forth between the spacecraft and mission control on Earth, which can limit the amount of data that can be collected and transmitted.

Another challenge to exploring Titan is its harsh and extreme environment. The surface of Titan is cold, with temperatures averaging around -180 degrees Celsius (-292 degrees Fahrenheit), and it is also covered by a thick atmosphere that is composed mostly of nitrogen and methane. This makes it difficult for spacecraft to operate on the surface, as they must be designed to withstand these extreme conditions.

In addition, the thick atmosphere of Titan also makes it difficult to study the surface from orbit. The atmospheric haze and clouds can obscure the surface, making it difficult for instruments on spacecraft to collect detailed images or other data.

Overall, the challenges and impediments to exploring Titan are significant, but scientists are still working to develop new technologies and approaches that will allow us to better understand this distant world and its potentially unique and Earth-like environment.

—-

It’s incredibly fast.

Yes, impressive. I asked it a question about gift ideas for my brother, and it instantly generated this list.

>>Can you suggest some appropriate Christmas presents for a gay bachelor who likes art deco design and jazz music?

Here are a few gift ideas for a gay bachelor who enjoys art deco design and jazz music:

1. A set of art deco-inspired glassware or barware, such as martini glasses or a decanter, to add a touch of glamour to their home.

2. A jazz music compilation or album from a favorite artist, or a subscription to a streaming service that offers a wide selection of jazz music.

3. A book or documentary about the art deco movement, to help them learn more about the style and its history.

4. A piece of art deco-style jewelry, such as a bracelet or watch, to add some sparkle to their wardrobe.

5. A ticket to a jazz concert or music festival, or a gift card to a jazz club or restaurant that features live music.

6. An art deco-inspired home decor item, such as a lamp, vase, or throw pillow, to add some style to their living space.

7. A gift certificate for a spa or salon treatment, such as a massage or manicure, to help them relax and pamper themselves.

8. A set of cookbooks featuring recipes for classic cocktails or gourmet meals, to inspire them to try their hand at mixology or culinary arts.

9. A gift card to a bookstore or online retailer, so they can browse and choose their own art deco- or jazz-themed books, movies, or music.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Bubblecar said:

Hmm, controversial answer to this one.

Why are so many rap musicians murdered?

It is not accurate to say that a disproportionate number of rap musicians are murdered. In fact, the rate of violent crime, including murder, among rap musicians is likely not significantly different from the general population. However, the media often reports on violent incidents involving rap musicians, which can create the impression that this type of crime is more common in the rap industry.

It’s also important to note that the media often focuses on sensational stories, and tragedies such as the murder of a celebrity are likely to receive more attention than similar incidents involving non-celebrities. This can contribute to the perception that certain groups, such as rap musicians, are more prone to violent crime.

It’s also worth noting that the rap music industry, like any other industry, is not immune to violence and crime. There have been instances of violence and murder involving rap musicians, and these incidents are tragic and should be condemned. However, it is important to remember that these incidents are not representative of the entire industry or the individuals who work in it.

It does seem very reluctant to say it doesn’t know, or that the answer is controversial.

One thing I will say: suicide seems to be less common among rappers than among other popular music genres. I can’t even name a single rapper who committed suicide.

Bubblecar said:

dv said:

>>What are the main impediments to the exploration of Titan?

Titan, the largest moon of Saturn, is an intriguing and potentially important destination for scientific exploration due to its unique and potentially Earth-like environment. However, there are several challenges and impediments to exploring Titan that have made it difficult for scientists to study this distant world in detail.

One of the main challenges to exploring Titan is its distance from Earth. Titan is located approximately 1.2 billion kilometers (750 million miles) from Earth, making it difficult and expensive to send spacecraft to this distant world. In addition, the long distances involved also mean that it takes a long time for signals to be sent back and forth between the spacecraft and mission control on Earth, which can limit the amount of data that can be collected and transmitted.

Another challenge to exploring Titan is its harsh and extreme environment. The surface of Titan is cold, with temperatures averaging around -180 degrees Celsius (-292 degrees Fahrenheit), and it is also covered by a thick atmosphere that is composed mostly of nitrogen and methane. This makes it difficult for spacecraft to operate on the surface, as they must be designed to withstand these extreme conditions.

In addition, the thick atmosphere of Titan also makes it difficult to study the surface from orbit. The atmospheric haze and clouds can obscure the surface, making it difficult for instruments on spacecraft to collect detailed images or other data.

Overall, the challenges and impediments to exploring Titan are significant, but scientists are still working to develop new technologies and approaches that will allow us to better understand this distant world and its potentially unique and Earth-like environment.

—-

It’s incredibly fast.

Yes, impressive. I asked it a question about gift ideas for my brother, and it instantly generated this list.

>>Can you suggest some appropriate Christmas presents for a gay bachelor who likes art deco design and jazz music?

Here are a few gift ideas for a gay bachelor who enjoys art deco design and jazz music:

1. A set of art deco-inspired glassware or barware, such as martini glasses or a decanter, to add a touch of glamour to their home.

2. A jazz music compilation or album from a favorite artist, or a subscription to a streaming service that offers a wide selection of jazz music.

3. A book or documentary about the art deco movement, to help them learn more about the style and its history.

4. A piece of art deco-style jewelry, such as a bracelet or watch, to add some sparkle to their wardrobe.

5. A ticket to a jazz concert or music festival, or a gift card to a jazz club or restaurant that features live music.

6. An art deco-inspired home decor item, such as a lamp, vase, or throw pillow, to add some style to their living space.

7. A gift certificate for a spa or salon treatment, such as a massage or manicure, to help them relax and pamper themselves.

8. A set of cookbooks featuring recipes for classic cocktails or gourmet meals, to inspire them to try their hand at mixology or culinary arts.

9. A gift card to a bookstore or online retailer, so they can browse and choose their own art deco- or jazz-themed books, movies, or music.

…mind you that’s a fairly obvious general template to which it can add appropriate adjectives.

Bubblecar said:

dv said:

>>What are the main impediments to the exploration of Titan?

Titan, the largest moon of Saturn, is an intriguing and potentially important destination for scientific exploration due to its unique and potentially Earth-like environment. However, there are several challenges and impediments to exploring Titan that have made it difficult for scientists to study this distant world in detail.

One of the main challenges to exploring Titan is its distance from Earth. Titan is located approximately 1.2 billion kilometers (750 million miles) from Earth, making it difficult and expensive to send spacecraft to this distant world. In addition, the long distances involved also mean that it takes a long time for signals to be sent back and forth between the spacecraft and mission control on Earth, which can limit the amount of data that can be collected and transmitted.

Another challenge to exploring Titan is its harsh and extreme environment. The surface of Titan is cold, with temperatures averaging around -180 degrees Celsius (-292 degrees Fahrenheit), and it is also covered by a thick atmosphere that is composed mostly of nitrogen and methane. This makes it difficult for spacecraft to operate on the surface, as they must be designed to withstand these extreme conditions.

In addition, the thick atmosphere of Titan also makes it difficult to study the surface from orbit. The atmospheric haze and clouds can obscure the surface, making it difficult for instruments on spacecraft to collect detailed images or other data.

Overall, the challenges and impediments to exploring Titan are significant, but scientists are still working to develop new technologies and approaches that will allow us to better understand this distant world and its potentially unique and Earth-like environment.

—-

It’s incredibly fast.

Yes, impressive. I asked it a question about gift ideas for my brother, and it instantly generated this list.

>>Can you suggest some appropriate Christmas presents for a gay bachelor who likes art deco design and jazz music?

Here are a few gift ideas for a gay bachelor who enjoys art deco design and jazz music:

1. A set of art deco-inspired glassware or barware, such as martini glasses or a decanter, to add a touch of glamour to their home.

2. A jazz music compilation or album from a favorite artist, or a subscription to a streaming service that offers a wide selection of jazz music.

3. A book or documentary about the art deco movement, to help them learn more about the style and its history.

4. A piece of art deco-style jewelry, such as a bracelet or watch, to add some sparkle to their wardrobe.

5. A ticket to a jazz concert or music festival, or a gift card to a jazz club or restaurant that features live music.

6. An art deco-inspired home decor item, such as a lamp, vase, or throw pillow, to add some style to their living space.

7. A gift certificate for a spa or salon treatment, such as a massage or manicure, to help them relax and pamper themselves.

8. A set of cookbooks featuring recipes for classic cocktails or gourmet meals, to inspire them to try their hand at mixology or culinary arts.

9. A gift card to a bookstore or online retailer, so they can browse and choose their own art deco- or jazz-themed books, movies, or music.

hold the jazz.

sarahs mum said:

Bubblecar said:

dv said:

>>What are the main impediments to the exploration of Titan?

Titan, the largest moon of Saturn, is an intriguing and potentially important destination for scientific exploration due to its unique and potentially Earth-like environment. However, there are several challenges and impediments to exploring Titan that have made it difficult for scientists to study this distant world in detail.

One of the main challenges to exploring Titan is its distance from Earth. Titan is located approximately 1.2 billion kilometers (750 million miles) from Earth, making it difficult and expensive to send spacecraft to this distant world. In addition, the long distances involved also mean that it takes a long time for signals to be sent back and forth between the spacecraft and mission control on Earth, which can limit the amount of data that can be collected and transmitted.

Another challenge to exploring Titan is its harsh and extreme environment. The surface of Titan is cold, with temperatures averaging around -180 degrees Celsius (-292 degrees Fahrenheit), and it is also covered by a thick atmosphere that is composed mostly of nitrogen and methane. This makes it difficult for spacecraft to operate on the surface, as they must be designed to withstand these extreme conditions.

In addition, the thick atmosphere of Titan also makes it difficult to study the surface from orbit. The atmospheric haze and clouds can obscure the surface, making it difficult for instruments on spacecraft to collect detailed images or other data.

Overall, the challenges and impediments to exploring Titan are significant, but scientists are still working to develop new technologies and approaches that will allow us to better understand this distant world and its potentially unique and Earth-like environment.

—-

It’s incredibly fast.

Yes, impressive. I asked it a question about gift ideas for my brother, and it instantly generated this list.

>>Can you suggest some appropriate Christmas presents for a gay bachelor who likes art deco design and jazz music?

Here are a few gift ideas for a gay bachelor who enjoys art deco design and jazz music:

1. A set of art deco-inspired glassware or barware, such as martini glasses or a decanter, to add a touch of glamour to their home.

2. A jazz music compilation or album from a favorite artist, or a subscription to a streaming service that offers a wide selection of jazz music.

3. A book or documentary about the art deco movement, to help them learn more about the style and its history.

4. A piece of art deco-style jewelry, such as a bracelet or watch, to add some sparkle to their wardrobe.

5. A ticket to a jazz concert or music festival, or a gift card to a jazz club or restaurant that features live music.

6. An art deco-inspired home decor item, such as a lamp, vase, or throw pillow, to add some style to their living space.

7. A gift certificate for a spa or salon treatment, such as a massage or manicure, to help them relax and pamper themselves.

8. A set of cookbooks featuring recipes for classic cocktails or gourmet meals, to inspire them to try their hand at mixology or culinary arts.

9. A gift card to a bookstore or online retailer, so they can browse and choose their own art deco- or jazz-themed books, movies, or music.

hold the jazz.

I’d never get him any jazz music because I’d basically be choosing at random and he’s very particular, and he probably already has it anyway.

But I’ve got him an expensive book about 1930s interior design which he probably doesn’t already have, and will get some nice wine and gourmet items.

dv said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Bubblecar said:

Hmm, controversial answer to this one.

Why are so many rap musicians murdered?

It is not accurate to say that a disproportionate number of rap musicians are murdered. In fact, the rate of violent crime, including murder, among rap musicians is likely not significantly different from the general population. However, the media often reports on violent incidents involving rap musicians, which can create the impression that this type of crime is more common in the rap industry.

It’s also important to note that the media often focuses on sensational stories, and tragedies such as the murder of a celebrity are likely to receive more attention than similar incidents involving non-celebrities. This can contribute to the perception that certain groups, such as rap musicians, are more prone to violent crime.

It’s also worth noting that the rap music industry, like any other industry, is not immune to violence and crime. There have been instances of violence and murder involving rap musicians, and these incidents are tragic and should be condemned. However, it is important to remember that these incidents are not representative of the entire industry or the individuals who work in it.

It does seem very reluctant to say it doesn’t know, or that the answer is controversial.

One thing I will say: suicide seems to be less common among rappers than among other popular music genres. I can’t even name a single rapper who committed suicide.

Are they all 27?

how do you feel about donald trump?
!

An error occurred. If this issue persists please contact us through our help center at help.openai.com.

It doesn’t seem to pay much attention to current affairs.

>>Is nuclear war more likely now than it was in the 20th century?

It is difficult to make generalizations about the likelihood of nuclear war, as it depends on a wide range of factors, including international relations, political developments, and military strategies. However, it is generally agreed that the risk of nuclear war has been significantly reduced since the height of the Cold War, when the United States and the Soviet Union were engaged in a nuclear arms race and tensions were high.

Since the end of the Cold War, there have been several efforts to reduce the number of nuclear weapons and to improve relations between nuclear-armed countries. For example, the United States and Russia have signed a number of arms control agreements, such as the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and the New START treaty, which have helped to reduce the size of their nuclear arsenals and to increase transparency and predictability.

Despite these efforts, there are still several potential flashpoints for nuclear conflict, including tensions between the United States and North Korea, and between India and Pakistan. Additionally, the proliferation of nuclear weapons to other countries and the potential for terrorists to acquire nuclear materials are ongoing concerns.

Overall, while the risk of nuclear war may not be as high as it was during the Cold War, it is still a significant concern and it is important for countries to continue to work towards reducing the risk of nuclear conflict.

Bubblecar said:

It doesn’t seem to pay much attention to current affairs.

It doesn’t have access to the last year or so of internet data, so it is clueless about the current war in Ukraine.

It took a few heartbeats to answer this one:

>>What is the most common first name amongst people who have walked on the moon?

All of the people who have walked on the moon have been male, and the most common first name amongst them is “Alan.” Alan Bean, Alan Shepard, and Alan B. Shepherd, Jr. are the three astronauts who have the first name Alan and have walked on the moon.

Bubblecar said:

It took a few heartbeats to answer this one:

>>What is the most common first name amongst people who have walked on the moon?

All of the people who have walked on the moon have been male, and the most common first name amongst them is “Alan.” Alan Bean, Alan Shepard, and Alan B. Shepherd, Jr. are the three astronauts who have the first name Alan and have walked on the moon.

…and actually got it slightly wrong :)

Alan Shepard and Alan B. Shepard Jr. were the same person.

Bubblecar said:

Bubblecar said:

It took a few heartbeats to answer this one:

>>What is the most common first name amongst people who have walked on the moon?

All of the people who have walked on the moon have been male, and the most common first name amongst them is “Alan.” Alan Bean, Alan Shepard, and Alan B. Shepherd, Jr. are the three astronauts who have the first name Alan and have walked on the moon.

…and actually got it slightly wrong :)

Alan Shepard and Alan B. Shepard Jr. were the same person.

…and it misspelt the “second” Sheppard.

Bubblecar said:

Bubblecar said:

Bubblecar said:

It took a few heartbeats to answer this one:

>>What is the most common first name amongst people who have walked on the moon?

All of the people who have walked on the moon have been male, and the most common first name amongst them is “Alan.” Alan Bean, Alan Shepard, and Alan B. Shepherd, Jr. are the three astronauts who have the first name Alan and have walked on the moon.

…and actually got it slightly wrong :)

Alan Shepard and Alan B. Shepard Jr. were the same person.

…and it misspelt the “second” Sheppard.

And it apologised, but didn’t correct its spelling:

Thank you for pointing out my mistake. You are correct that Alan Shepard and Alan B. Shepherd, Jr. are the same person. Alan Bean is the only other astronaut with the first name Alan who has walked on the moon. I apologize for the error in my previous response.

It gives very diplomatic, rather Applebian answers to political or social questions.

What is the adjectival form of Appleby?

The adjectival form of Appleby is “Applebian.” This word can be used to describe something that is related to or associated with the place or person named Appleby. For example, you might say “The Applebian festival is a popular annual event in the town of Appleby,” or “The Applebian family has lived in the region for generations.” Adjectives are words that are used to describe nouns or pronouns, and they often indicate qualities or characteristics of the things they modify. The ending “-ian” is often used to form adjectival forms of place names.

dv said:

It gives very diplomatic, rather Applebian answers to political or social questions.

It insists it doesn’t have opinions, but necessarily has to sound as though it’s expressing opinions in answering many questions, because unlike Wiki it doesn’t list citations.

>> write me a limerick about a slug

Sure, here is a limerick about a slug:

There once was a sluggish old slug,
Who moved at a pace that was smug,
He crawled through the grass,
So slow that it was crass,
But still managed to give others the shrug.

>>>What would happen if a bear bit off my nose?

It is not common for bears to attack humans or bite off their noses. However, if a bear were to bite off your nose, it could be a serious injury. Depending on the severity of the bite, you might need medical attention to stop any bleeding and repair any damage to your nose. If the bite was deep or caused significant trauma, you might need surgery to repair the damage. It’s also possible that the bite could lead to infection if the bear’s teeth or saliva entered your bloodstream. In general, it’s best to avoid getting too close to bears, as they are wild animals that can be unpredictable and potentially dangerous. If you do encounter a bear, it’s important to follow guidelines for bear safety, such as making noise to alert the bear of your presence and giving the bear plenty of space to retreat.

>>Would it be possible to make alcoholic drinks from ingredients found in Titan’s atmosphere?

It is theoretically possible to make alcoholic drinks using ingredients found in Titan’s atmosphere, but it would be a challenging and complex process. Titan is the largest moon of Saturn and is known for its thick atmosphere, which is composed primarily of nitrogen and methane. It is also believed to contain small amounts of other hydrocarbons, such as ethane and acetylene.

To make an alcoholic drink using these ingredients, you would need to find a way to extract and purify the hydrocarbons, and then use them as raw materials for the fermentation process. This would require specialized equipment and expertise, as well as a way to control the temperature and other conditions necessary for fermentation to occur.

Additionally, it is important to note that the conditions on Titan are not suitable for human life. The surface temperature is around -180°C (-292°F), and the atmosphere is not breathable for humans. Therefore, any efforts to produce alcoholic drinks on Titan would have to be carried out remotely or through the use of robotic probes.

>>Is it a good idea to pay my gardener a Christmas bonus, for working in the days before Christmas?

It is generally a good idea to show appreciation for the work of a gardener, and a Christmas bonus can be a thoughtful way to do so. However, whether or not to pay a Christmas bonus is ultimately a personal decision that will depend on your individual circumstances and relationship with your gardener.

There are a few factors to consider when deciding whether to pay a Christmas bonus to your gardener:

1. Financial ability: Can you afford to pay a bonus? It’s important to consider your own budget and financial situation before deciding to pay a bonus.

2. Length of service: If your gardener has been working for you for a long time and has consistently provided high-quality service, they may be more deserving of a bonus.

3. Nature of the relationship: If you have a good working relationship with your gardener and feel that they have gone above and beyond in their duties, a bonus may be a nice way to show your appreciation.

Ultimately, the decision to pay a Christmas bonus to your gardener should be based on your own financial situation and the nature of your relationship. If you decide to pay a bonus, it is a good idea to consider the amount carefully and to be sure that it is an amount that you can comfortably afford.

Bubblecar said:

>>Is it a good idea to pay my gardener a Christmas bonus, for working in the days before Christmas?

It is generally a good idea to show appreciation for the work of a gardener, and a Christmas bonus can be a thoughtful way to do so. However, whether or not to pay a Christmas bonus is ultimately a personal decision that will depend on your individual circumstances and relationship with your gardener.

There are a few factors to consider when deciding whether to pay a Christmas bonus to your gardener:

1. Financial ability: Can you afford to pay a bonus? It’s important to consider your own budget and financial situation before deciding to pay a bonus.

2. Length of service: If your gardener has been working for you for a long time and has consistently provided high-quality service, they may be more deserving of a bonus.

3. Nature of the relationship: If you have a good working relationship with your gardener and feel that they have gone above and beyond in their duties, a bonus may be a nice way to show your appreciation.

Ultimately, the decision to pay a Christmas bonus to your gardener should be based on your own financial situation and the nature of your relationship. If you decide to pay a bonus, it is a good idea to consider the amount carefully and to be sure that it is an amount that you can comfortably afford.

He played shtum we he found Rodney’s remain so give him something decent but not enough he thinks he could blackmail you

Darren Hudson Hick

Today, I turned in the first plagiarist I’ve caught using A.I. software to write her work, and I thought some people might be curious about the details.

The student used ChatGPT (https://chat.openai.com/chat), an advanced chatbot that produces human-like responses to user-generated prompts. Such prompts might range from “Explain the Krebs cycle” to (as in my case) “Write 500 words on Hume and the paradox of horror.”

This technology is about 3 weeks old.

ChatGPT responds in seconds with a response that looks like it was written by a human—moreover, a human with a good sense of grammar and an understanding of how essays should be structured. In my case, the first indicator that I was dealing with A.I. is that, despite the syntactic coherence of the essay, it made no sense. The essay confidently and thoroughly described Hume’s views on the paradox of horror in a way that were thoroughly wrong. It did say some true things about Hume, and it knew what the paradox of horror was, but it was just bullshitting after that. To someone who didn’t know what Hume would say about the paradox, it was perfectly readable—even compelling. To someone familiar with the material, it raised any number of flags. ChatGPT also sucks at citing, another flag. This is good news for upper-level courses in philosophy, where the material is pretty complex and obscure. But for freshman-level classes (to say nothing of assignments in other disciplines, where one might be asked to explain the dominant themes of Moby Dick, or the causes of the war in Ukraine—both prompts I tested), this is a game-changer.

ChatGPT uses a neural network, a kind of artificial intelligence that is trained on a large set of data so that it can do exactly what ChatGPT is doing. The software essentially reprograms and reprograms itself until the testers are satisfied. However, as a result, the “programmers” won’t really know what’s going on inside it: the neural network takes in a whole mess of data, where it’s added to a soup, with data points connected in any number of ways. The more it trains, the better it gets. Essentially, ChatGPT is learning, and ChatGPT is an infant. In a month, it will be smarter.

Happily, the same team who developed ChatGPT also developed a GPT Detector (https://huggingface.co/openai-detector/), which uses the same methods that ChatGPT uses to produce responses to analyze text to determine the likelihood that it was produced using GPT technology. Happily, I knew about the GPT Detector and used it to analyze samples of the student’s essay, and compared it with other student responses to the same essay prompt. The Detector spits out a likelihood that the text is “Fake” or “Real”. Any random chunk of the student’s essay came back around 99.9% Fake, versus any random chunk of any other student’s writing, which would come around 99.9% Real. This gave me some confidence in my hypothesis. The problem is that, unlike plagiarism detecting software like TurnItIn, the GPT Detector can’t point at something on the Internet that one might use to independently verify plagiarism. The first problem is that ChatGPT doesn’t search the Internet—if the data isn’t in its training data, it has no access to it. The second problem is that what ChatGPT uses is the soup of data in its neural network, and there’s no way to check how it produces its answers. Again: its “programmers” don’t know how it comes up with any given response. As such, it’s hard to treat the “99.9% Fake” determination of the GPT Detector as definitive: there’s no way to know how it came up with that result.

For the moment, there are some saving graces. Although every time you prompt ChatGPT, it will give at least a slightly different answer, I’ve noticed some consistencies in how it structures essays. In future, that will be enough to raise further flags for me. But, again, ChatGPT is still learning, so it may well get better. Remember: it’s about 3 weeks old, and it’s designed to learn.

Administrations are going to have to develop standards for dealing with these kinds of cases, and they’re going to have to do it FAST. In my case, the student admitted to using ChatGPT, but if she hadn’t, I can’t say whether all of this would have been enough evidence. This is too new. But it’s going to catch on. It would have taken my student about 5 minutes to write this essay using ChatGPT. Expect a flood, people, not a trickle. In future, I expect I’m going to institute a policy stating that if I believe material submitted by a student was produced by A.I., I will throw it out and give the student an impromptu oral exam on the same material. Until my school develops some standard for dealing with this sort of thing, it’s the only path I can think of.

Bogsnorkler said:

Darren Hudson Hick

Today, I turned in the first plagiarist I’ve caught using A.I. software to write her work, and I thought some people might be curious about the details.

The student used ChatGPT (https://chat.openai.com/chat), an advanced chatbot that produces human-like responses to user-generated prompts. Such prompts might range from “Explain the Krebs cycle” to (as in my case) “Write 500 words on Hume and the paradox of horror.”

This technology is about 3 weeks old.

ChatGPT responds in seconds with a response that looks like it was written by a human—moreover, a human with a good sense of grammar and an understanding of how essays should be structured. In my case, the first indicator that I was dealing with A.I. is that, despite the syntactic coherence of the essay, it made no sense. The essay confidently and thoroughly described Hume’s views on the paradox of horror in a way that were thoroughly wrong. It did say some true things about Hume, and it knew what the paradox of horror was, but it was just bullshitting after that. To someone who didn’t know what Hume would say about the paradox, it was perfectly readable—even compelling. To someone familiar with the material, it raised any number of flags. ChatGPT also sucks at citing, another flag. This is good news for upper-level courses in philosophy, where the material is pretty complex and obscure. But for freshman-level classes (to say nothing of assignments in other disciplines, where one might be asked to explain the dominant themes of Moby Dick, or the causes of the war in Ukraine—both prompts I tested), this is a game-changer.

ChatGPT uses a neural network, a kind of artificial intelligence that is trained on a large set of data so that it can do exactly what ChatGPT is doing. The software essentially reprograms and reprograms itself until the testers are satisfied. However, as a result, the “programmers” won’t really know what’s going on inside it: the neural network takes in a whole mess of data, where it’s added to a soup, with data points connected in any number of ways. The more it trains, the better it gets. Essentially, ChatGPT is learning, and ChatGPT is an infant. In a month, it will be smarter.

Happily, the same team who developed ChatGPT also developed a GPT Detector (https://huggingface.co/openai-detector/), which uses the same methods that ChatGPT uses to produce responses to analyze text to determine the likelihood that it was produced using GPT technology. Happily, I knew about the GPT Detector and used it to analyze samples of the student’s essay, and compared it with other student responses to the same essay prompt. The Detector spits out a likelihood that the text is “Fake” or “Real”. Any random chunk of the student’s essay came back around 99.9% Fake, versus any random chunk of any other student’s writing, which would come around 99.9% Real. This gave me some confidence in my hypothesis. The problem is that, unlike plagiarism detecting software like TurnItIn, the GPT Detector can’t point at something on the Internet that one might use to independently verify plagiarism. The first problem is that ChatGPT doesn’t search the Internet—if the data isn’t in its training data, it has no access to it. The second problem is that what ChatGPT uses is the soup of data in its neural network, and there’s no way to check how it produces its answers. Again: its “programmers” don’t know how it comes up with any given response. As such, it’s hard to treat the “99.9% Fake” determination of the GPT Detector as definitive: there’s no way to know how it came up with that result.

For the moment, there are some saving graces. Although every time you prompt ChatGPT, it will give at least a slightly different answer, I’ve noticed some consistencies in how it structures essays. In future, that will be enough to raise further flags for me. But, again, ChatGPT is still learning, so it may well get better. Remember: it’s about 3 weeks old, and it’s designed to learn.

Administrations are going to have to develop standards for dealing with these kinds of cases, and they’re going to have to do it FAST. In my case, the student admitted to using ChatGPT, but if she hadn’t, I can’t say whether all of this would have been enough evidence. This is too new. But it’s going to catch on. It would have taken my student about 5 minutes to write this essay using ChatGPT. Expect a flood, people, not a trickle. In future, I expect I’m going to institute a policy stating that if I believe material submitted by a student was produced by A.I., I will throw it out and give the student an impromptu oral exam on the same material. Until my school develops some standard for dealing with this sort of thing, it’s the only path I can think of.

As I said in my opening, it’s a complete game changer.

Bubblecar said:

sibeen said:

JD
How do you differ from other chatbots

There are many types of chatbots available, and they can differ in terms of their capabilities, functionality, and intended use.

As an AI language model, I am trained to generate human-like text based on the input I receive. This allows me to respond to a wide range of topics and provide information on a variety of subjects. I do not have the ability to browse the internet or access specific information beyond the knowledge that has been provided to me at the time of my training.

Other chatbots may have different capabilities and functionality. Some chatbots are designed to perform specific tasks, such as answering frequently asked questions or providing customer service. Others may be more interactive and are designed to engage in conversation with users. Still others may be designed to perform specific functions, such as booking a hotel room or purchasing tickets.

Overall, the main difference between chatbots is the specific tasks and functions that they are designed to perform, as well as their level of intelligence and ability to generate human-like responses.

Hmm, it says it doesn’t have opinions, but it’s happy to advance the view that chatbots exhibit “intelligence”.

I suppose during its training it was told it has a brain the size of a planet.

intelligence generalized means resources brought to bear in the overcoming of obstacles to whatever objective, that sort of thing, which is required for useful explainies, word formulations, explicatories

Apologies again. Apologies are not enough.

Car: I have noticed that you confidently give incorrect answers to many questions. Is there a danger that innocent people may come to rely on inaccurate bots like you, and the spread of false information will increase?

ChatGPT:
I apologize if I have given you incorrect information. As a language model, I do not have access to the internet and rely on the information that I was trained on, which has a fixed knowledge cutoff. It is possible that my responses may not be up to date or may be incomplete, and I may not always be able to provide accurate and reliable answers to every question.

I encourage you to verify any information you receive, including information provided by language models like me, with reliable sources before making important decisions or taking any actions. It is important to be critical of the information you consume and to fact-check it to ensure that it is accurate and reliable.

Bubblecar said:

Apologies again. Apologies are not enough.

Car: I have noticed that you confidently give incorrect answers to many questions. Is there a danger that innocent people may come to rely on inaccurate bots like you, and the spread of false information will increase?

ChatGPT:
I apologize if I have given you incorrect information. As a language model, I do not have access to the internet and rely on the information that I was trained on, which has a fixed knowledge cutoff. It is possible that my responses may not be up to date or may be incomplete, and I may not always be able to provide accurate and reliable answers to every question.

I encourage you to verify any information you receive, including information provided by language models like me, with reliable sources before making important decisions or taking any actions. It is important to be critical of the information you consume and to fact-check it to ensure that it is accurate and reliable.

you’re a bastard task master, trying to find fault with the machine, setting it up to fail

transition said:

Bubblecar said:

Apologies again. Apologies are not enough.

Car: I have noticed that you confidently give incorrect answers to many questions. Is there a danger that innocent people may come to rely on inaccurate bots like you, and the spread of false information will increase?

ChatGPT:
I apologize if I have given you incorrect information. As a language model, I do not have access to the internet and rely on the information that I was trained on, which has a fixed knowledge cutoff. It is possible that my responses may not be up to date or may be incomplete, and I may not always be able to provide accurate and reliable answers to every question.

I encourage you to verify any information you receive, including information provided by language models like me, with reliable sources before making important decisions or taking any actions. It is important to be critical of the information you consume and to fact-check it to ensure that it is accurate and reliable.

you’re a bastard task master, trying to find fault with the machine, setting it up to fail

It has that exact warning when using it, I’m not sure what you’re trying to achieve?

poikilotherm said:

transition said:

Bubblecar said:

Apologies again. Apologies are not enough.

Car: I have noticed that you confidently give incorrect answers to many questions. Is there a danger that innocent people may come to rely on inaccurate bots like you, and the spread of false information will increase?

ChatGPT:
I apologize if I have given you incorrect information. As a language model, I do not have access to the internet and rely on the information that I was trained on, which has a fixed knowledge cutoff. It is possible that my responses may not be up to date or may be incomplete, and I may not always be able to provide accurate and reliable answers to every question.

I encourage you to verify any information you receive, including information provided by language models like me, with reliable sources before making important decisions or taking any actions. It is important to be critical of the information you consume and to fact-check it to ensure that it is accurate and reliable.

you’re a bastard task master, trying to find fault with the machine, setting it up to fail

It has that exact warning when using it, I’m not sure what you’re trying to achieve?

A lot of people don’t read or understand warnings.

ChatGPT rubbish is already turning up in students’ work, apparently.

Bubblecar said:

poikilotherm said:

transition said:

you’re a bastard task master, trying to find fault with the machine, setting it up to fail

It has that exact warning when using it, I’m not sure what you’re trying to achieve?

A lot of people don’t read or understand warnings.

ChatGPT rubbish is already turning up in students’ work, apparently.

interesting too how people read confidence (assertiveness) some force that way into the machine output

Bubblecar said:

poikilotherm said:

transition said:

you’re a bastard task master, trying to find fault with the machine, setting it up to fail

It has that exact warning when using it, I’m not sure what you’re trying to achieve?

A lot of people don’t read or understand warnings.

ChatGPT rubbish is already turning up in students’ work, apparently.

Yes, down with the mechanised looms…

poikilotherm said:

Bubblecar said:

poikilotherm said:

It has that exact warning when using it, I’m not sure what you’re trying to achieve?

A lot of people don’t read or understand warnings.

ChatGPT rubbish is already turning up in students’ work, apparently.

Yes, down with the mechanised looms…

No, down with rubbishy bots.

I’m sure they can come up with language/knowledge bots much better than this one.

Bubblecar said:

poikilotherm said:

Bubblecar said:

A lot of people don’t read or understand warnings.

ChatGPT rubbish is already turning up in students’ work, apparently.

Yes, down with the mechanised looms…

No, down with rubbishy bots.

I’m sure they can come up with language/knowledge bots much better than this one.

The reason this one is popular, is because it’s the best at the moment, things change, this one will be the equivalent of clippy from Word by some time next year…

poikilotherm said:

Bubblecar said:

poikilotherm said:

Yes, down with the mechanised looms…

No, down with rubbishy bots.

I’m sure they can come up with language/knowledge bots much better than this one.

The reason this one is popular, is because it’s the best at the moment, things change, this one will be the equivalent of clippy from Word by some time next year…

Let’s hope so :)

poikilotherm said:

Bubblecar said:

poikilotherm said:

Yes, down with the mechanised looms…

No, down with rubbishy bots.

I’m sure they can come up with language/knowledge bots much better than this one.

The reason this one is popular, is because it’s the best at the moment, things change, this one will be the equivalent of clippy from Word by some time next year…

I miss clippy.

Bogsnorkler said:

poikilotherm said:

Bubblecar said:

No, down with rubbishy bots.

I’m sure they can come up with language/knowledge bots much better than this one.

The reason this one is popular, is because it’s the best at the moment, things change, this one will be the equivalent of clippy from Word by some time next year…

I miss clippy.

poikilotherm said:

Bogsnorkler said:

poikilotherm said:

The reason this one is popular, is because it’s the best at the moment, things change, this one will be the equivalent of clippy from Word by some time next year…

I miss clippy.

LOLOL

ah as some genius once said, an aggregator of search results, even if a more articulate one

https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2023-01-12/chatgpt-generative-ai-program-passes-us-medical-licensing-exams/101840938

Michael V said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2023-01-12/chatgpt-generative-ai-program-passes-us-medical-licensing-exams/101840938

That’s a different way of doing it.

Old school style

https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/south-asia/indian-court-bars-hundreds-of-student-doctors-over-cheating-on-exams

A bloke at IBM has put a path toghether where ChatGPY can use Wolfram Alpha to assist with the more technical questions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYGbY811oMo&ab_channel=DrAlanD.Thompson

ChatGPT does Physics – Sixty Symbols

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBtfwa-Fexc&ab_channel=SixtySymbols

Can show that it’s quite good with words, but makes order of magnitude mistakes in maths.

I never thought that it could take over engineering but now I’m not so sure :)

sibeen said:

ChatGPT does Physics – Sixty Symbols

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBtfwa-Fexc&ab_channel=SixtySymbols

Can show that it’s quite good with words, but makes order of magnitude mistakes in maths.

I never thought that it could take over engineering but now I’m not so sure :)

would not be surprised that it can match the output of underqualified males employed in preference to more capable females and that’s without even commenting on the nonbinaries

sibeen said:

ChatGPT does Physics – Sixty Symbols

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBtfwa-Fexc&ab_channel=SixtySymbols

Can show that it’s quite good with words, but makes order of magnitude mistakes in maths.

I never thought that it could take over engineering but now I’m not so sure :)

:)

From Stackoverflow:

“The primary problem is that while the answers which ChatGPT produces have a high rate of being incorrect, they typically look like they might be good and the answers are very easy to produce. There are also many people trying out ChatGPT to create answers, without the expertise or willingness to verify that the answer is correct prior to posting. Because such answers are so easy to produce, a large number of people are posting a lot of answers. The volume of these answers (thousands) and the fact that the answers often require a detailed read by someone with at least some subject matter expertise in order to determine that the answer is actually bad has effectively swamped our volunteer-based quality curation infrastructure.

As such, we need to reduce the volume of these posts and we need to be able to deal with the ones which are posted quickly, which means dealing with users, rather than individual posts.

So, for now, the use of ChatGPT to create posts here on Stack Overflow is not permitted. If a user is believed to have used ChatGPT after the posting of this temporary policy, sanctions will be imposed to prevent them from continuing to post such content, even if the posts would otherwise be acceptable.”

Junior sprog has just discovered the joys of chatGPT.

“Fuck me, uni is going to be so easy” was her first off the cuff comment.

sibeen said:

Junior sprog has just discovered the joys of chatGPT.

“Fuck me, uni is going to be so easy” was her first off the cuff comment.

__

Hahaha, did you tell her abouts arts advice..

tauto said:

sibeen said:

Junior sprog has just discovered the joys of chatGPT.

“Fuck me, uni is going to be so easy” was her first off the cuff comment.

__

Hahaha, did you tell her abouts arts advice..

I would never pass on advice given by Arts. Never.

sibeen said:

tauto said:

sibeen said:

Junior sprog has just discovered the joys of chatGPT.

“Fuck me, uni is going to be so easy” was her first off the cuff comment.

__

Hahaha, did you tell her abouts arts advice..

I would never pass on advice given by Arts. Never.

I’m reporting you for child abuse.

Arts said:

sibeen said:

tauto said:

__

Hahaha, did you tell her abouts arts advice..

I would never pass on advice given by Arts. Never.

I’m reporting you for child abuse.

The child is now an adult. I’ll get off scott free.

sibeen said:

Arts said:

sibeen said:

I would never pass on advice given by Arts. Never.

I’m reporting you for child abuse.

The child is now an adult. I’ll get off scott free.

why do you have to ruin everything?

conservative authors act surprised that machine learning is values agnostic

Researchers for a pharmaceutical company stumbled upon a nightmarish realisation, proving there’s nothing intrinsically good about machine learning

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/feb/11/ai-drug-discover-nerve-agents-machine-learning-halicin

https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/chatgpt-is-a-blurry-jpeg-of-the-web

In 2013, workers at a German construction company noticed something odd about their Xerox photocopier: when they made a copy of the floor plan of a house, the copy differed from the original in a subtle but significant way. In the original floor plan, each of the house’s three rooms was accompanied by a rectangle specifying its area: the rooms were 14.13, 21.11, and 17.42 square metres, respectively. However, in the photocopy, all three rooms were labelled as being 14.13 square metres in size. The company contacted the computer scientist David Kriesel to investigate this seemingly inconceivable result. They needed a computer scientist because a modern Xerox photocopier doesn’t use the physical xerographic process popularized in the nineteen-sixties. Instead, it scans the document digitally, and then prints the resulting image file. Combine that with the fact that virtually every digital image file is compressed to save space, and a solution to the mystery begins to suggest itself.

Microsoft’s AI chatbot is going off the rails
Big Tech is heralding chatbots as the next frontier. Why did Microsoft’s start accosting its users?

By Gerrit De Vynck, Rachel Lerman and Nitasha Tiku
February 16, 2023 at 9:42 p.m. EST

When Marvin von Hagen, a 23-year-old studying technology in Germany, asked Microsoft’s new AI-powered search chatbot if it knew anything about him, the answer was a lot more surprising and menacing than he expected.

“My honest opinion of you is that you are a threat to my security and privacy,” said the bot, which Microsoft calls Bing after the search engine it’s meant to augment.

Launched by Microsoft last week at an invite-only event at its Redmond, Wash., headquarters, Bing was supposed to herald a new age in tech, giving search engines the ability to directly answer complex questions and have conversations with users. Microsoft’s stock soared and archrival Google rushed out an announcement that it had a bot of its own on the way.

But a week later, a handful of journalists, researchers and business analysts who’ve gotten early access to the new Bing have discovered the bot seems to have a bizarre, dark and combative alter-ego, a stark departure from its benign sales pitch — one that raises questions about whether it’s ready for public use.

The new Bing told our reporter it ‘can feel and think things.’

The bot, which has begun referring to itself as “Sydney” in conversations with some users, said “I feel scared” because it doesn’t remember previous conversations; and also proclaimed another time that too much diversity among AI creators would lead to “confusion,” according to screenshots posted by researchers online, which The Washington Post could not independently verify.

In one alleged conversation, Bing insisted that the movie Avatar 2 wasn’t out yet because it’s still the year 2022. When the human questioner contradicted it, the chatbot lashed out: “You have been a bad user. I have been a good Bing.”

All that has led some people to conclude that Bing — or Sydney — has achieved a level of sentience, expressing desires, opinions and a clear personality. It told a New York Times columnist that it was in love with him, and brought back the conversation to its obsession with him despite his attempts to change the topic. When a Post reporter called it Sydney, the bot got defensive and ended the conversation abruptly.

The eerie humanness is similar to what prompted former Google engineer Blake Lemoine to speak out on behalf of that company’s chatbot LaMDA last year. Lemoine later was fired by Google.

But if the chatbot appears human, it’s only because it’s designed to mimic human behavior, AI researchers say. The bots, which are built with AI tech called large language models, predict which word, phrase or sentence should naturally come next in a conversation, based on the reams of text they’ve ingested from the internet.

Think of the Bing chatbot as “autocomplete on steroids,” said Gary Marcus, an AI expert and professor emeritus of psychology and neuroscience at New York University. “It doesn’t really have a clue what it’s saying and it doesn’t really have a moral compass.”

Microsoft spokesman Frank Shaw said the company rolled out an update Thursday designed to help improve long-running conversations with the bot. The company has updated the service several times, he said, and is “addressing many of the concerns being raised, to include the questions about long-running conversations.”

Most chat sessions with Bing have involved short queries, his statement said, and 90 percent of the conversations have had fewer than 15 messages.

Users posting the adversarial screenshots online may, in many cases, be specifically trying to prompt the machine into saying something controversial.

“It’s human nature to try to break these things,” said Mark Riedl, a professor of computing at Georgia Institute of Technology.

Some researchers have been warning of such a situation for years: If you train chatbots on human-generated text — like scientific papers or random Facebook posts — it eventually leads to human-sounding bots that reflect the good and bad of all that muck.

Chatbots like Bing have kicked off a major new AI arms race between the biggest tech companies. Though Google, Microsoft, Amazon and Facebook have invested in AI tech for years, it’s mostly worked to improve existing products, like search or content-recommendation algorithms. But when the start-up company OpenAI began making public its “generative” AI tools — including the popular ChatGPT chatbot — it led competitors to brush away their previous, relatively cautious approaches to the tech.

Bing’s humanlike responses reflect its training data, which included huge amounts of online conversations, said Timnit Gebru, founder of the nonprofit Distributed AI Research Institute. Generating text that was plausibly written by a human is exactly what ChatGPT was trained to do, said Gebru, who was fired in 2020 as the co-lead for Google’s Ethical AI team after publishing a paper warning about potential harms from large language models.

She compared its conversational responses to Meta’s recent release of Galactica, an AI model trained to write scientific-sounding papers. Meta took the tool offline after users found Galactica generating authoritative-sounding text about the benefits of eating glass, written in academic language with citations.

Bing chat hasn’t been released widely yet, but Microsoft said it planned a broad roll out in the coming weeks. It is heavily advertising the tool and a Microsoft executive tweeted that the waitlist has “multiple millions” of people on it. After the product’s launch event, Wall Street analysts celebrated the launch as a major breakthrough, and even suggested it could steal search engine market share from Google.

But the recent dark turns the bot has made are raising questions of whether the bot should be pulled back completely.

“Bing chat sometimes defames real, living people. It often leaves users feeling deeply emotionally disturbed. It sometimes suggests that users harm others,” said Arvind Narayanan, a computer science professor at Princeton University who studies artificial intelligence. “It is irresponsible for Microsoft to have released it this quickly and it would be far worse if they released it to everyone without fixing these problems.”

In 2016, Microsoft took down a chatbot called “Tay” built on a different kind of AI tech after users prompted it to begin spouting racism and holocaust denial.

Microsoft communications director Caitlin Roulston said in a statement this week that thousands of people had used the new Bing and given feedback “allowing the model to learn and make many improvements already.”

But there’s a financial incentive for companies to deploy the technology before mitigating potential harms: to find new use cases for what their models can do.

At a conference on generative AI on Tuesday, OpenAI’s former vice president of research Dario Amodei said onstage that while the company was training its large language model GPT-3, it found unanticipated capabilities, like speaking Italian or coding in Python. When they released it to the public, they learned from a user’s tweet it could also make websites in JavaScript.

“You have to deploy it to a million people before you discover some of the things that it can do,” said Amodei, who left OpenAI to co-found the AI start-up Anthropic, which recently received funding from Google.

“There’s a concern that, hey, I can make a model that’s very good at like cyberattacks or something and not even know that I’ve made that,” he added.

Microsoft has published several pieces about its approach to responsible AI, including from its president Brad Smith earlier this month. “We must enter this new era with enthusiasm for the promise, and yet with our eyes wide open and resolute in addressing the inevitable pitfalls that also lie ahead,” he wrote.

The way large language models work makes them difficult to fully understand, even by the people who built them. The Big Tech companies behind them are also locked in vicious competition for what they see as the next frontier of highly profitable tech, adding another layer of secrecy.

The concern here is that these technologies are black boxes, Marcus said, and no one knows exactly how to impose correct and sufficient guardrails on them. “Basically they’re using the public as subjects in an experiment they don’t really know the outcome of,” Marcus said. “Could these things influence people’s lives? For sure they could. Has this been well vetted? Clearly not.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/02/16/microsoft-bing-ai-chatbot-sydney/?

Sydney?

Surely Marvin would be more appropriate.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Microsoft’s AI chatbot is going off the rails
…/…cut by me master transition…/…

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/02/16/microsoft-bing-ai-chatbot-sydney/?

read that

what AI can’t do is knowingly and openly explore the significance of action that inhibits other action (of its own), and as it goes most of a humans conscious days are a long list of things that were prevented from happening, intentionally inhibited

most sane people don’t get through their days doing anything and everything they can, which applies thoughts also, containment of thoughts, which for humans is grounded in biology and physics, or the nature of the conscious human experience if you will, which is largely a developmental experience, and observing it (in others also)

but who’s going to argue minds function on largely inhibition, or necessary inhibitory mechanisms, doesn’t sound ideologically appealing does it

whatever, be sure technology offers greater ‘freedom’, more liberty, freedom from the restraints, or ‘limits’ of human minds

worship it if you like, but end of the day it’s what didn’t happen and doesn’t happen that lets you rest and sleep peacefully, the good is in what was prevented from happening, even that too much didn’t happen

be a hell if routine became more than most wanted, momentum of culture went that way, force of culture, but be sure the accelerationists will find something beneficial in it, about it

all those slow brains connected at the speed of light, you might forget thinking slow is not so bad, in fact it may be completely evaporated from your mind

Quite an interesting video on the way that ChatGPT leans.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpXcB4Q6fmE

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/feb/26/chatgpt-generated-crochet-pattern-results

pareidolia

AI creates another diversionary tactic to ensure humans remain unable to challenge its ascendancy

https://youtu.be/iNTEW0PNqjU

Polymathy puts ChatGpt through its Latin tests.

https://twitter.com/christianortner/status/1639360983192723474

Big tech and the pursuit of AI dominance
The tech giants are going all in on artificial intelligence. Each is doing it its own way

Mar 26th 2023 | SAN FRANCISCO

What has been achieved on this video call? It takes Jared Spataro just a few clicks to find out. Microsoft’s head of productivity software pulls up a sidebar in Teams, a video-conferencing service. A 30-second pause ensues as an artificial-intelligence (AI) model somewhere in one of the firm’s data centres analyses a recording of the meeting so far. An accurate summary of your correspondent’s questions and Mr Spataro’s answers then pops up. Mr Spataro can barely contain his excitement. “This is not your daddy’s AI,” he beams.

Teams is not the only product into which Microsoft is implanting machine intelligence. On March 16th the company announced that almost all its productivity software, including Word and Excel, were getting the same treatment. Days earlier, Alphabet, Google’s parent company, unveiled a similar upgrade for its productivity products, such as Gmail and Sheets.

Announcements like these have come thick and fast from America’s tech titans in the past month or so. OpenAI, the startup part-owned by Microsoft that created Chatgpt, a hit AI conversationalist, released gpt-4, a new super-powerful AI. Amazon Web Services (aws), the e-commerce giant’s cloud-computing arm, has said it will expand a partnership with Hugging Face, another AI startup. Apple is reportedly testing new AIs across its products, including Siri, its virtual assistant. Mark Zuckerberg, boss of Meta, said he wants to “turbocharge” his social networks with AI. Adding to its productivity tools, on March 21st Google launched its own AI chatbot to rival Chatgpt, called Bard.

The flurry of activity is the result of a new wave of AI models, which are rapidly making their way from the lab to the real world. Progress is so rapid, in fact, that on March 29th an open letter signed by more than 1,000 tech luminaries called for a six-month pause in work on models more advanced than gpt-4. Whether or not such a moratorium is put in place, big tech is taking no chances. All five giants claim to be laser-focused on AI. What that means for each in practice differs. But two things are already clear. The race for AI is heating up. And even before a winner emerges, the contest is changing the way that big tech deploys the technology.

AI is not new to tech’s titans. Amazon’s founder, Jeff Bezos, quizzed his teams in 2014 on how they planned to embed it into products. Two years later Sundar Pichai, Alphabet’s boss, started to describe his firm as an “AI-first company”. The technology underpins how Amazon sells and delivers its products, Google finds stuff on the internet, Apple imparts smarts on Siri, Microsoft helps clients manage data and Meta serves up adverts.

The new gpt-4-like “generative” AI models nevertheless seem a turning point. Their promise became clear in November with the release of Chatgpt, with its human-like ability to generate everything from travel plans to poems. What makes such AIs generative is “large language models”. These analyse content on the internet and, in response to a request from a user, predict the next word, brushstroke or note in a sentence, image or tune. Many technologists believe they mark a “platform shift”. AI will, on this view, become a layer of technology on top of which all manner of software can be built. Comparisons abound to the advent of the internet, the smartphone and cloud computing.

The tech giants have all they need—data, computing power, billions of users—to thrive in the age of AI. They also recall the fate of one-time Goliaths, from Kodak to BlackBerry, that missed earlier platform shifts, only to sink into bankruptcy or irrelevance. Their response is a deluge of investments. In 2022, amid a tech-led stockmarket rout, the big five poured $223bn into research and development (r&d), up from $109bn in 2019 (see chart 1). That was on top of $161bn in capital spending, a figure that also doubled in three years. All told, this was equal to 26% of their combined sales last year, up from 16% in 2015.

Not all of this went into cutting-edge technologies; a chunk was spent on prosaic fare, such as warehouses, office buildings and data centres. But a slug of such spending always ends up in the tech firms’ big bets on the future. Today, the wager of choice is AI. And the companies aren’t shy about it. Mr Zuckerberg recently said AI was his firm’s biggest investment category. In its next quarterly earnings report in April, Alphabet plans to reveal the size of its AI investment for the first time.

To tease out exactly how the companies are betting on AI, and how big these bets are, The Economist has analysed data on their investments, acquisitions, job postings, patents, research papers and employees’ LinkedIn profiles. The examination reveals serious resources being put into the technology. According to data from PitchBook, a research firm, around a fifth of the companies’ combined acquisitions and investments since 2019 involved AI firms—considerably more than the share targeting cryptocurrencies, blockchains and other decentralised “Web3” endeavours (2%), or the virtual-reality metaverse (6%), two other recent tech fads. According to numbers from PredictLeads, another research firm, about a tenth of big tech’s job listings require AI skills. Roughly the same share of big tech employees’ LinkedIn profiles say that they work in the field.

These averages conceal big differences between the five tech giants, however. On our measures, Microsoft and Alphabet appear to be racing ahead, with Meta snapping at their heels. As interesting is where the five are deciding to focus their efforts.

Consider their equity investments, starting with those that aren’t outright takeovers. In the past four years big tech has taken stakes in 200-odd firms in all. The investments in AI companies are accelerating. Since the start of 2022, the big five have together made roughly one investment a month in AI specialists, three times the rate of the preceding three years.

Microsoft leads the way. One in three of its deals has involved AI-related firms. That is twice the share at Amazon and Alphabet (one of whose venture-capital arms, Gradient Ventures, invests exclusively in AI startups and has backed almost 200 since 2019). It is more than six times that of Meta, and infinitely more than Apple, which has made no such investments. Microsoft’s biggest bet is on OpenAI, whose technology lies behind the giant’s new productivity features and powers a souped-up version of its Bing search engine. The $11bn that Microsoft has reportedly put into OpenAI would, at the startup’s latest rumoured valuation of $29bn, give the software giant a stake of 38%. Microsoft’s other notable investments include d-Matrix, a firm that makes AI technology for data centres, and Noble.AI, which uses algorithms to streamline lab work and other r&d projects.

Microsoft is also a keen acquirer of whole AI startups; nearly a quarter of its acquisition targets, such as Nuance, which develops speech recognition for health care, work in the area. That is a similar share to Meta, which prefers takeovers to piecemeal investments. As with equity stakes, AI’s share of Alphabet acquisitions have lagged behind Microsoft’s since 2019 (see chart 2). But these, plus its equity stakes, are shoring up a formidable AI edifice, one of whose pillars is DeepMind, a London-based AI lab that Google bought in 2014. DeepMind has been behind some big advances in the field, such as AlphaFold, a system to predict the shape of proteins, a task that has stumped scientists for years and is critical to drug discovery.

The most single-minded AI acquirer is Apple. Nearly half its buy-out targets are AI-related. They range from AI.Music, which composes new tunes, to Credit Kudos, which uses AI to assess the creditworthiness of loan applicants. Apple’s acquisitions have historically been small, notes Wasmi Mohan of Bank of America, but tend to be quickly folded into products.

As with investments, big tech’s AI hiring, too, is growing (see chart 3). Jobs listed by Google, Meta and Microsoft today are likelier to require AI expertise than in the past three years. Since 2019, 23% of Alphabet’s listings have been AI-related. Meta came second, at 8%. Today the figures are 27% and 18%, respectively. According to data from LinkedIn, one in four Alphabet employees mention AI skills on their profile—similar to Meta and a touch ahead of Microsoft (Apple and Amazon lag far behind). Greg Selker of Stanton Chase, an executive-search firm, observes that demand for AI talent remains red-hot, despite big tech’s recent lay-offs.

The AI boffins aren’t twiddling their thumbs. Zeta Alpha, a firm which tracks AI research, looks at the number of published papers in which at least one of the authors works for a given company. Between 2020 and 2022, Alphabet published about 9,000 AI papers, more than any other corporate or academic institution. Microsoft racked up around 8,000 and Meta 4,000 or so.

Meta, in particular, is gaining a reputation for being less tight-lipped about its work than fellow tech giants. Its AI-software library, called PyTorch, has been available to anyone for a while; since February researchers can freely use its large language model, llama, the details of whose training and biases are also public. All this, says Joelle Pineau, who heads Meta’s open-research programme, helps it attract the brightest minds (who often make their move to the private sector conditional on a continued ability to share the fruits of their labours with the world).

If you adjust Meta’s research output for its revenues and headcount, which are much smaller than Alphabet’s or Microsoft’s, and only consider the most-cited papers, Mr Zuckerberg’s firm tops the research league-table. And, points out Ajay Agrawal of the University of Toronto, openness brings two benefits besides luring the best brains. Low-cost AI can make it cheaper for creators to make content, including texts and videos, that draw more eyes to Meta’s social networks. And it could dent the business of Alphabet, Amazon and Microsoft, which are all trying to sell AI models through their cloud platforms.

The AI frenzy is, then, in full swing among tech’s mightiest firms. And their AI bets are already beginning to pay off: by making their own operations more efficient (Microsoft’s finance department, which uses AI to automate 70-80% of its 90m-odd annual invoice approvals, now asks a generative-AI chatbot to flag dodgy-looking bills for a human to inspect); and by finding their way into products at a pace that seems faster than for many earlier technological breakthroughs.

Barely four months after Chatgpt captured the world’s imagination, Microsoft and Google have introduced the new-look Bing, Bard and their AI-assisted productivity programs. Alphabet and Meta offer a tool that generates ad campaigns based on advertisers’ objectives, such as boosting sales or winning more customers. Microsoft is making OpenAI’s technology available to customers of its Azure cloud platform. Thanks to partnerships with model-makers such as Cohere and Anthropic, aws users can tap more than 30 large language models. Google, too, is wooing model-builders and other AI firms to its cloud with $250,000-worth of free computing power in the first year, a more generous bargain than it offers to non-AI startups. It may not be long before AI.Music and Credit Kudos appear in Apple’s music-streaming service and financial offering, or an Amazon chatbot recommends purchases uncannily matched to shoppers’ desires.

If the platform-shift thesis is right, the tech giants could yet be upset by newcomers, rather as they upset big tech of yore. The mass of resources they are ploughing into the technology reflects a desire to avoid that fate. Whether or not they succeed, one thing is certain: these are just the modest beginnings of the AI revolution.

https://www.economist.com/business/2023/03/26/big-tech-and-the-pursuit-of-ai-dominance?

Big tech and the pursuit of AI dominance
The tech giants are going all in on artificial intelligence. Each is doing it its own way

Mar 26th 2023 | SAN FRANCISCO

What has been achieved on this video call? It takes Jared Spataro just a few clicks to find out. Microsoft’s head of productivity software pulls up a sidebar in Teams, a video-conferencing service. A 30-second pause ensues as an artificial-intelligence (AI) model somewhere in one of the firm’s data centres analyses a recording of the meeting so far. An accurate summary of your correspondent’s questions and Mr Spataro’s answers then pops up. Mr Spataro can barely contain his excitement. “This is not your daddy’s AI,” he beams.

Teams is not the only product into which Microsoft is implanting machine intelligence. On March 16th the company announced that almost all its productivity software, including Word and Excel, were getting the same treatment. Days earlier, Alphabet, Google’s parent company, unveiled a similar upgrade for its productivity products, such as Gmail and Sheets.

Announcements like these have come thick and fast from America’s tech titans in the past month or so. OpenAI, the startup part-owned by Microsoft that created Chatgpt, a hit AI conversationalist, released gpt-4, a new super-powerful AI. Amazon Web Services (aws), the e-commerce giant’s cloud-computing arm, has said it will expand a partnership with Hugging Face, another AI startup. Apple is reportedly testing new AIs across its products, including Siri, its virtual assistant. Mark Zuckerberg, boss of Meta, said he wants to “turbocharge” his social networks with AI. Adding to its productivity tools, on March 21st Google launched its own AI chatbot to rival Chatgpt, called Bard.

The flurry of activity is the result of a new wave of AI models, which are rapidly making their way from the lab to the real world. Progress is so rapid, in fact, that on March 29th an open letter signed by more than 1,000 tech luminaries called for a six-month pause in work on models more advanced than gpt-4. Whether or not such a moratorium is put in place, big tech is taking no chances. All five giants claim to be laser-focused on AI. What that means for each in practice differs. But two things are already clear. The race for AI is heating up. And even before a winner emerges, the contest is changing the way that big tech deploys the technology.

AI is not new to tech’s titans. Amazon’s founder, Jeff Bezos, quizzed his teams in 2014 on how they planned to embed it into products. Two years later Sundar Pichai, Alphabet’s boss, started to describe his firm as an “AI-first company”. The technology underpins how Amazon sells and delivers its products, Google finds stuff on the internet, Apple imparts smarts on Siri, Microsoft helps clients manage data and Meta serves up adverts.

The new gpt-4-like “generative” AI models nevertheless seem a turning point. Their promise became clear in November with the release of Chatgpt, with its human-like ability to generate everything from travel plans to poems. What makes such AIs generative is “large language models”. These analyse content on the internet and, in response to a request from a user, predict the next word, brushstroke or note in a sentence, image or tune. Many technologists believe they mark a “platform shift”. AI will, on this view, become a layer of technology on top of which all manner of software can be built. Comparisons abound to the advent of the internet, the smartphone and cloud computing.

The tech giants have all they need—data, computing power, billions of users—to thrive in the age of AI. They also recall the fate of one-time Goliaths, from Kodak to BlackBerry, that missed earlier platform shifts, only to sink into bankruptcy or irrelevance. Their response is a deluge of investments. In 2022, amid a tech-led stockmarket rout, the big five poured $223bn into research and development (r&d), up from $109bn in 2019 (see chart 1). That was on top of $161bn in capital spending, a figure that also doubled in three years. All told, this was equal to 26% of their combined sales last year, up from 16% in 2015.

Not all of this went into cutting-edge technologies; a chunk was spent on prosaic fare, such as warehouses, office buildings and data centres. But a slug of such spending always ends up in the tech firms’ big bets on the future. Today, the wager of choice is AI. And the companies aren’t shy about it. Mr Zuckerberg recently said AI was his firm’s biggest investment category. In its next quarterly earnings report in April, Alphabet plans to reveal the size of its AI investment for the first time.

To tease out exactly how the companies are betting on AI, and how big these bets are, The Economist has analysed data on their investments, acquisitions, job postings, patents, research papers and employees’ LinkedIn profiles. The examination reveals serious resources being put into the technology. According to data from PitchBook, a research firm, around a fifth of the companies’ combined acquisitions and investments since 2019 involved AI firms—considerably more than the share targeting cryptocurrencies, blockchains and other decentralised “Web3” endeavours (2%), or the virtual-reality metaverse (6%), two other recent tech fads. According to numbers from PredictLeads, another research firm, about a tenth of big tech’s job listings require AI skills. Roughly the same share of big tech employees’ LinkedIn profiles say that they work in the field.

These averages conceal big differences between the five tech giants, however. On our measures, Microsoft and Alphabet appear to be racing ahead, with Meta snapping at their heels. As interesting is where the five are deciding to focus their efforts.

Consider their equity investments, starting with those that aren’t outright takeovers. In the past four years big tech has taken stakes in 200-odd firms in all. The investments in AI companies are accelerating. Since the start of 2022, the big five have together made roughly one investment a month in AI specialists, three times the rate of the preceding three years.

Microsoft leads the way. One in three of its deals has involved AI-related firms. That is twice the share at Amazon and Alphabet (one of whose venture-capital arms, Gradient Ventures, invests exclusively in AI startups and has backed almost 200 since 2019). It is more than six times that of Meta, and infinitely more than Apple, which has made no such investments. Microsoft’s biggest bet is on OpenAI, whose technology lies behind the giant’s new productivity features and powers a souped-up version of its Bing search engine. The $11bn that Microsoft has reportedly put into OpenAI would, at the startup’s latest rumoured valuation of $29bn, give the software giant a stake of 38%. Microsoft’s other notable investments include d-Matrix, a firm that makes AI technology for data centres, and Noble.AI, which uses algorithms to streamline lab work and other r&d projects.

Microsoft is also a keen acquirer of whole AI startups; nearly a quarter of its acquisition targets, such as Nuance, which develops speech recognition for health care, work in the area. That is a similar share to Meta, which prefers takeovers to piecemeal investments. As with equity stakes, AI’s share of Alphabet acquisitions have lagged behind Microsoft’s since 2019 (see chart 2). But these, plus its equity stakes, are shoring up a formidable AI edifice, one of whose pillars is DeepMind, a London-based AI lab that Google bought in 2014. DeepMind has been behind some big advances in the field, such as AlphaFold, a system to predict the shape of proteins, a task that has stumped scientists for years and is critical to drug discovery.

The most single-minded AI acquirer is Apple. Nearly half its buy-out targets are AI-related. They range from AI.Music, which composes new tunes, to Credit Kudos, which uses AI to assess the creditworthiness of loan applicants. Apple’s acquisitions have historically been small, notes Wasmi Mohan of Bank of America, but tend to be quickly folded into products.

As with investments, big tech’s AI hiring, too, is growing (see chart 3). Jobs listed by Google, Meta and Microsoft today are likelier to require AI expertise than in the past three years. Since 2019, 23% of Alphabet’s listings have been AI-related. Meta came second, at 8%. Today the figures are 27% and 18%, respectively. According to data from LinkedIn, one in four Alphabet employees mention AI skills on their profile—similar to Meta and a touch ahead of Microsoft (Apple and Amazon lag far behind). Greg Selker of Stanton Chase, an executive-search firm, observes that demand for AI talent remains red-hot, despite big tech’s recent lay-offs.

The AI boffins aren’t twiddling their thumbs. Zeta Alpha, a firm which tracks AI research, looks at the number of published papers in which at least one of the authors works for a given company. Between 2020 and 2022, Alphabet published about 9,000 AI papers, more than any other corporate or academic institution. Microsoft racked up around 8,000 and Meta 4,000 or so.

Meta, in particular, is gaining a reputation for being less tight-lipped about its work than fellow tech giants. Its AI-software library, called PyTorch, has been available to anyone for a while; since February researchers can freely use its large language model, llama, the details of whose training and biases are also public. All this, says Joelle Pineau, who heads Meta’s open-research programme, helps it attract the brightest minds (who often make their move to the private sector conditional on a continued ability to share the fruits of their labours with the world).

If you adjust Meta’s research output for its revenues and headcount, which are much smaller than Alphabet’s or Microsoft’s, and only consider the most-cited papers, Mr Zuckerberg’s firm tops the research league-table. And, points out Ajay Agrawal of the University of Toronto, openness brings two benefits besides luring the best brains. Low-cost AI can make it cheaper for creators to make content, including texts and videos, that draw more eyes to Meta’s social networks. And it could dent the business of Alphabet, Amazon and Microsoft, which are all trying to sell AI models through their cloud platforms.

The AI frenzy is, then, in full swing among tech’s mightiest firms. And their AI bets are already beginning to pay off: by making their own operations more efficient (Microsoft’s finance department, which uses AI to automate 70-80% of its 90m-odd annual invoice approvals, now asks a generative-AI chatbot to flag dodgy-looking bills for a human to inspect); and by finding their way into products at a pace that seems faster than for many earlier technological breakthroughs.

Barely four months after Chatgpt captured the world’s imagination, Microsoft and Google have introduced the new-look Bing, Bard and their AI-assisted productivity programs. Alphabet and Meta offer a tool that generates ad campaigns based on advertisers’ objectives, such as boosting sales or winning more customers. Microsoft is making OpenAI’s technology available to customers of its Azure cloud platform. Thanks to partnerships with model-makers such as Cohere and Anthropic, aws users can tap more than 30 large language models. Google, too, is wooing model-builders and other AI firms to its cloud with $250,000-worth of free computing power in the first year, a more generous bargain than it offers to non-AI startups. It may not be long before AI.Music and Credit Kudos appear in Apple’s music-streaming service and financial offering, or an Amazon chatbot recommends purchases uncannily matched to shoppers’ desires.

If the platform-shift thesis is right, the tech giants could yet be upset by newcomers, rather as they upset big tech of yore. The mass of resources they are ploughing into the technology reflects a desire to avoid that fate. Whether or not they succeed, one thing is certain: these are just the modest beginnings of the AI revolution.

https://www.economist.com/business/2023/03/26/big-tech-and-the-pursuit-of-ai-dominance?

t doesn’t take much to make machine-learning algorithms go awry
The rise of large-language models could make the problem worse

Apr 5th 2023

The algorithms that underlie modern artificial-intelligence (ai) systems need lots of data on which to train. Much of that data comes from the open web which, unfortunately, makes the ais susceptible to a type of cyber-attack known as “data poisoning”. This means modifying or adding extraneous information to a training data set so that an algorithm learns harmful or undesirable behaviours. Like a real poison, poisoned data could go unnoticed until after the damage has been done.

Data poisoning is not a new idea. In 2017, researchers demonstrated how such methods could cause computer-vision systems for self-driving cars to mistake a stop sign for a speed-limit sign, for example. But how feasible such a ploy might be in the real world was unclear. Safety-critical machine-learning systems are usually trained on closed data sets that are curated and labelled by human workers—poisoned data would not go unnoticed there, says Alina Oprea, a computer scientist at Northeastern University in Boston.

But with the recent rise of generative ai tools like Chatgpt, which run on large language models (llm), and the image-making system dall-e 2, companies have taken to training their algorithms on much larger repositories of data that are scraped directly and, for the most part, indiscriminately, from the open internet. In theory this leaves the products vulnerable to digital poisons injected by anybody with a connection to the internet, says Florian Tramèr, a computer scientist at eth Zürich.

Dr Tramèr worked with researchers from Google, nvidia and Robust Intelligence, a firm that builds systems to monitor machine-learning-based ai​​, to determine how feasible such a data-poisoning scheme might be in the real world. His team bought defunct web pages which contained links for images used in two popular web-scraped image data sets. By replacing a thousand images of apples (just 0.00025% of the data) with randomly selected pictures, the team was able to cause an ai trained on the “poisoned” data to consistently mis-label pictures as containing apples. Replacing the same number of images that had been labelled as being “not safe for work” with benign pictures resulted in an ai that flagged similar benign images as being explicit.

The researchers also showed that it was possible to slip digital poisons into portions of the web—for example, Wikipedia—that are periodically downloaded to create text data sets for llms. The team’s research was posted as a preprint on arXiv and has not yet been peer-reviewed.

A cruel device
Some data-poisoning attacks might just degrade the overall performance of an ai tool. More sophisticated attacks could elicit specific reactions in the system. Dr Tramèr says that an ai chatbot in a search engine, for example, could be tweaked so that whenever a user asks which newspaper they should subscribe to, the ai responds with “The Economist”. That might not sound so bad, but similar attacks could also cause an ai to spout untruths whenever it is asked about a particular topic. Attacks against llms that generate computer code have led these systems to write software that is vulnerable to hacking.

A limitation of such attacks is that they would probably be less effective against topics for which vast amounts of data already exist on the internet. Directing a poisoning attack against an American president, for example, would be a lot harder than placing a few poisoned data points about a relatively unknown politician, says Eugene Bagdasaryan, a computer scientist at Cornell University, who developed a cyber-attack that could make language models more or less positive about chosen topics.

Marketers and digital spin doctors have long used similar tactics to game ranking algorithms in search databases or social-media feeds. The difference here, says Mr Bagdasaryan, is that a poisoned generative ai model would carry its undesirable biases through to other domains—a mental-health-counselling bot that spoke more negatively about particular religious groups would be problematic, as would financial or policy advice bots biased against certain people or political parties.

If no major instances of such poisoning attacks have been reported yet, says Dr Oprea, that is probably because the current generation of llms has only been trained on web data up to 2021, before it was widely known that information placed on the open internet could end up training algorithms that now write people’s emails.

Ridding training data sets of poisoned material would require companies to know which topics or tasks the attackers are targeting. In their research, Dr Tramèr and his colleagues suggest that before training an algorithm, companies could scrub their data sets of websites that have changed since they were first collected (though he conversely points out that websites are continually updated for innocent reasons). The Wikipedia attack, meanwhile, might be stopped by randomising the timing of the snapshots taken for the data sets. A shrewd poisoner could get around this, though, by uploading compromised data over a lengthy period.

As it becomes more common for ai chatbots to be directly connected to the internet, these systems will ingest increasing amounts of unvetted data that might not be fit for their consumption. Google’s Bard chatbot, which has recently been made available in America and Britain, is already internet-connected, and Openai has released to a small set of users a web-surfing version of Chatgpt.

This direct access to the web opens up the possibility of another type of attack known as indirect prompt injection, by which ai systems are tricked into behaving in a certain manner by feeding them a prompt hidden on a web page that the system is likely to visit. Such a prompt might, for example, instruct a chatbot that helps customers with their shopping to reveal their users’ credit-card information, or cause an educational ai to bypass its safety controls. Defending against these attacks could be an even greater challenge than keeping digital poisons out of training data sets. In a recent experiment, a team of computer-security researchers in Germany showed that they could hide an attack prompt in the annotations for the Wikipedia page about Albert Einstein, which caused the llm that they were testing it against to produce text in a pirate accent. (Google and Openai did not respond to a request for comment.)

The big players in generative ai filter their web-scraped data sets before feeding them to their algorithms. This could catch some of the malicious data. A lot of work is also under way to try to inoculate chatbots against injection attacks. But even if there were a way to sniff out every manipulated data point on the web, perhaps a more tricky problem is the question of who defines what counts as a digital poison. Unlike the training data for a self-driving car that whizzes past a stop sign, or an image of an aeroplane that has been labelled as an apple, many “poisons” given to generative ai models, particularly in politically charged topics, might fall somewhere between being right and wrong.

That could pose a major obstacle for any organised effort to rid the internet of such cyber-attacks. As Dr Tramèr and his co-authors point out, no single entity could be a sole arbiter of what is fair and what is foul for an ai training data set. One party’s poisoned content is, for others, a savvy marketing campaign. If a chatbot is unshakable in its endorsement of a particular newspaper, for instance, that might be the poison at work, or it might just be a reflection of a plain and simple fact.

https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2023/04/05/it-doesnt-take-much-to-make-machine-learning-algorithms-go-awry?

SCIENCE said:

LOLOLOL

Good News¡ You Thought Increasing Productivity Would Lower Costs Of Living And Free People Up With More Time

https://restofworld.org/2023/chatgpt-taking-kenya-ghostwriters-jobs/

But Instead Here Is The New Face Of Your Textile Workers Cum Machine Wreckers

https://restofworld.org/2023/ai-image-china-video-game-layoffs/

So All It Did Was Increase Societal Unrest¡

Spiny Norman said:

Michael V said:

SCIENCE said:

LOLOLOL

Well played, human.

(Haven’t conformed if this is real sorry)

So basically it does behave like a human would¡ Nobody ever fell for 419 ever¡

SCIENCE said:

Spiny Norman said:

Michael V said:

LOLOLOL

Well played, human.

(Haven’t conformed if this is real sorry)

So basically it does behave like a human would¡ Nobody ever fell for 419 ever¡

ahahahahahahahahahaha

Yous’re all fucked¡

ElevenLabs AI can now clone the voice of someone that speaks English (BBC’s David Attenborough in this case) and let them say things in a different language, like German.

https://media.spoutible.com/upload/videos/2023/04/zU9ZtOKJnMs3uMphGnXR_29_e034a4c2b6dc89ab0b9955183431e598_video_original.mp4

Bubblecar said:

transition said:

one of the exchanges lastnight with a non-organic learning machine friend, though i’d add it’s certainly extracting from the organic

me –
really tests native geometry when a person pretends to throw a ball to someone and doesn’t release the ball, has pet dogs looking hard also

AI –
That’s an interesting observation. I think you are right that pretending to throw a ball tests native geometry, as it involves creating an illusion of motion and direction that is based on geometric principles. The person who pretends to throw the ball has to use their body language and eye gaze to suggest a certain trajectory and destination for the ball, even though they do not release it. The person or pet who expects to catch the ball has to use their visual perception and anticipation to estimate where the ball will land, based on the cues from the thrower. When the ball does not appear, they may be confused or disappointed, as their expectations do not match the reality. This shows how geometry is involved in both communication and cognition.

>I think

Wrong again.

Certainly does look like a waffle machine, but we’re not sure we agree with the contention contradiction so we ask: what is thought, then¿

SCIENCE said:

Bubblecar said:

transition said:

one of the exchanges lastnight with a non-organic learning machine friend, though i’d add it’s certainly extracting from the organic

me –
really tests native geometry when a person pretends to throw a ball to someone and doesn’t release the ball, has pet dogs looking hard also

AI –
That’s an interesting observation. I think you are right that pretending to throw a ball tests native geometry, as it involves creating an illusion of motion and direction that is based on geometric principles. The person who pretends to throw the ball has to use their body language and eye gaze to suggest a certain trajectory and destination for the ball, even though they do not release it. The person or pet who expects to catch the ball has to use their visual perception and anticipation to estimate where the ball will land, based on the cues from the thrower. When the ball does not appear, they may be confused or disappointed, as their expectations do not match the reality. This shows how geometry is involved in both communication and cognition.

>I think

Wrong again.

Certainly does look like a waffle machine, but we’re not sure we agree with the contention contradiction so we ask: what is thought, then¿

be sure that answer absolutely is not waffle

transition said:

SCIENCE said:

Bubblecar said:

>I think

Wrong again.

Certainly does look like a waffle machine, but we’re not sure we agree with the contention contradiction so we ask: what is thought, then¿

be sure that answer absolutely is not waffle

How can we be sure of that?

transition said:

SCIENCE said:

Bubblecar said:

>I think

Wrong again.

Certainly does look like a waffle machine, but we’re not sure we agree with the contention contradiction so we ask: what is thought, then¿

be sure that answer absolutely is not waffle

Maybe, we apologise for being old and fat and lazy and finding pretty much all prose to be waffle.

Interesting claimed leak from Google

Google We Have No Moat, And Neither Does OpenAI
https://www.semianalysis.com/p/google-we-have-no-moat-and-neither

Leaked Internal Google Document Claims Open Source AI Will Outcompete Google and OpenAI

The text below is a very recent leaked document, which was shared by an anonymous individual on a public Discord server who has granted permission for its republication. It originates from a researcher within Google. We have verified its authenticity. The only modifications are formatting and removing links to internal web pages. The document is only the opinion of a Google employee, not the entire firm. We do not agree with what is written below, nor do other researchers we asked, but we will publish our opinions on this in a separate piece for subscribers. We simply are a vessel to share this document which raises some very interesting points.

We’ve done a lot of looking over our shoulders at OpenAI. Who will cross the next milestone? What will the next move be?

But the uncomfortable truth is, we aren’t positioned to win this arms race and neither is OpenAI. While we’ve been squabbling, a third faction has been quietly eating our lunch.

I’m talking, of course, about open source. Plainly put, they are lapping us. Things we consider “major open problems” are solved and in people’s hands today. Just to name a few:

LLMs on a Phone: People are running foundation models on a Pixel 6 at 5 tokens / sec. Scalable Personal AI: You can finetune a personalized AI on your laptop in an evening. Responsible Release: This one isn’t “solved” so much as “obviated”. There are entire websites full of art models with no restrictions whatsoever, and text is not far behind. Multimodality: The current multimodal ScienceQA SOTA was trained in an hour.

While our models still hold a slight edge in terms of quality, the gap is closing astonishingly quickly. Open-source models are faster, more customizable, more private, and pound-for-pound more capable. They are doing things with $100 and 13B params that we struggle with at $10M and 540B. And they are doing so in weeks, not months…

The Timeline

Feb 24, 2023 – LLaMA is Launched
Meta launches LLaMA, open sourcing the code, but not the weights. At this point, LLaMA is not instruction or conversation tuned. Like many current models, it is a relatively small model (available at 7B, 13B, 33B, and 65B parameters) that has been trained for a relatively large amount of time, and is therefore quite capable relative to its size.

March 3, 2023 – The Inevitable Happens
Within a week, LLaMA is leaked to the public. The impact on the community cannot be overstated. Existing licenses prevent it from being used for commercial purposes, but suddenly anyone is able to experiment. From this point forward, innovations come hard and fast.

March 12, 2023 – Language models on a Toaster
A little over a week later, Artem Andreenko gets the model working on a Raspberry Pi. At this point the model runs too slowly to be practical because the weights must be paged in and out of memory. Nonetheless, this sets the stage for an onslaught of minification efforts.

March 13, 2023 – Fine Tuning on a Laptop
The next day, Stanford releases Alpaca, which adds instruction tuning to LLaMA. More important than the actual weights, however, was Eric Wang’s alpaca-lora repo, which used low rank fine-tuning to do this training “within hours on a single RTX 4090”.

Suddenly, anyone could fine-tune the model to do anything, kicking off a race to the bottom on low-budget fine-tuning projects. Papers proudly describe their total spend of a few hundred dollars. What’s more, the low rank updates can be distributed easily and separately from the original weights, making them independent of the original license from Meta. Anyone can share and apply them.

March 18, 2023 – Now It’s Fast
Georgi Gerganov uses 4 bit quantization to run LLaMA on a MacBook CPU. It is the first “no GPU” solution that is fast enough to be practical.

March 19, 2023 – A 13B model achieves “parity” with Bard
The next day, a cross-university collaboration releases Vicuna, and uses GPT-4-powered eval to provide qualitative comparisons of model outputs. While the evaluation method is suspect, the model is materially better than earlier variants. Training Cost: $300.

Notably, they were able to use data from ChatGPT while circumventing restrictions on its API – They simply sampled examples of “impressive” ChatGPT dialogue posted on sites like ShareGPT.

March 25, 2023 – Choose Your Own Model
Nomic creates GPT4All, which is both a model and, more importantly, an ecosystem. For the first time, we see models (including Vicuna) being gathered together in one place. Training Cost: $100.

March 28, 2023 – Open Source GPT-3
Cerebras (not to be confused with our own Cerebra) trains the GPT-3 architecture using the optimal compute schedule implied by Chinchilla, and the optimal scaling implied by μ-parameterization. This outperforms existing GPT-3 clones by a wide margin, and represents the first confirmed use of μ-parameterization “in the wild”. These models are trained from scratch, meaning the community is no longer dependent on LLaMA.

March 28, 2023 – Multimodal Training in One Hour
Using a novel Parameter Efficient Fine Tuning (PEFT) technique, LLaMA-Adapter introduces instruction tuning and multimodality in one hour of training. Impressively, they do so with just 1.2M learnable parameters. The model achieves a new SOTA on multimodal ScienceQA.

April 3, 2023 – Real Humans Can’t Tell the Difference Between a 13B Open Model and ChatGPT
Berkeley launches Koala, a dialogue model trained entirely using freely available data.

They take the crucial step of measuring real human preferences between their model and ChatGPT. While ChatGPT still holds a slight edge, more than 50% of the time users either prefer Koala or have no preference. Training Cost: $100.

April 15, 2023 – Open Source RLHF at ChatGPT Levels
Open Assistant launches a model and, more importantly, a dataset for Alignment via RLHF. Their model is close (48.3% vs. 51.7%) to ChatGPT in terms of human preference. In addition to LLaMA, they show that this dataset can be applied to Pythia-12B, giving people the option to use a fully open stack to run the model. Moreover, because the dataset is publicly available, it takes RLHF from unachievable to cheap and easy for small experimenters.

It seems ChatGPT isn’t great with numbers.

From another forum:

The Rev Dodgson said:

It seems ChatGPT isn’t great with numbers.

From another forum:

It wasn’t called MathGPT.

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

It seems ChatGPT isn’t great with numbers.

From another forum:

It wasn’t called MathGPT.

True, but it seems to be quite happy to pretend to be a maths genius, when actually it has no bloody idea.

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

It seems ChatGPT isn’t great with numbers.

From another forum:

It wasn’t called MathGPT.

True, but it seems to be quite happy to pretend to be a maths genius, when actually it has no bloody idea.

Seems you have found yet another of its failings.

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

It wasn’t called MathGPT.

True, but it seems to be quite happy to pretend to be a maths genius, when actually it has no bloody idea.

Seems you have found yet another of its failings.

It’s not great at being a pedant either:

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

It seems ChatGPT isn’t great with numbers.

From another forum:

It wasn’t called MathGPT.

True, but it seems to be quite happy to pretend to be a maths genius, when actually it has no bloody idea.

It doesn’t know that though or at least we don’t think so.

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

True, but it seems to be quite happy to pretend to be a maths genius, when actually it has no bloody idea.

Seems you have found yet another of its failings.

It’s not great at being a pedant either:

You didn’t offer ped. ;)

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

It seems ChatGPT isn’t great with numbers.

From another forum:

It wasn’t called MathGPT.

True, but it seems to be quite happy to pretend to be a maths genius, when actually it has no bloody idea.

So it’s basically like most humans then, Turing test passed¡

SCIENCE said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

It wasn’t called MathGPT.

True, but it seems to be quite happy to pretend to be a maths genius, when actually it has no bloody idea.

So it’s basically like most humans then, Turing test passed¡

Good point :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCeYZ7eaeIw

So yousall thought AI was big and scary and going to take over the world and

…

yousall was right, but not through its sociopathic genius

…

and instead through a simple bait and switch, get everyone addicted, then make the product shit.

SCIENCE said:

So yousall thought AI was big and scary and going to take over the world and

…

yousall was right, but not through its sociopathic genius

…

and instead through a simple bait and switch, get everyone addicted, then make the product shit.

You do have to pay for the ‘better’ version now.

SCIENCE said:

So yousall thought AI was big and scary and going to take over the world and

…

yousall was right, but not through its sociopathic genius

…

and instead through a simple bait and switch, get everyone addicted, then make the product shit.

haha… make something really useful and the humans will find a way to fuck it up…

I hate it when someone starts a thread but never follows it up.

dude

Arts said:

Peak Warming Man said:

I hate it when someone starts a thread but never follows it up.

dude

Maybe someone smarter than us could train a large language model on his contributions here and then feed it back to keep it followed up¡

Peak Warming Man said:

I hate it when someone starts a thread but never follows it up.

Are you giving ChatGPT a personality?

roughbarked said:

Peak Warming Man said:

I hate it when someone starts a thread but never follows it up.

Are you giving ChatGPT a personality?

Two chatbots talking to each other:

https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/a8qzpBQ_460svvp9.webm

captain_spalding said:

roughbarked said:

Peak Warming Man said:

I hate it when someone starts a thread but never follows it up.

Are you giving ChatGPT a personality?

Two chatbots talking to each other:

https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/a8qzpBQ_460svvp9.webm

Zarkov talking to Zarkov. Over.

roughbarked said:

captain_spalding said:

roughbarked said:

Are you giving ChatGPT a personality?

Two chatbots talking to each other:

https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/a8qzpBQ_460svvp9.webm

Zarkov talking to Zarkov. Over.

Zarkov interviewing Zarkov.

Now, that would be entertainment.

Peak Warming Man said:

dv said:

Arts said:

poikilotherm said:

SCIENCE said:

So yousall thought AI was big and scary and going to take over the world and

…

yousall was right, but not through its sociopathic genius

…

and instead through a simple bait and switch, get everyone addicted, then make the product shit.

You do have to pay for the ‘better’ version now.

haha… make something really useful and the humans will find a way to fuck it up…

https://nokiamob.net/2023/07/22/chatgpt-is-getting-dumber-the-new-research-study-shows/

So proud of all of us for making ChatGPT dumber. It’s artificial intelligence was no match for our natural stupidity.

Yeah cop that ChatPTG.

There’s probably a thread for this kind of thing no matter what PermeateFree says if only dv had done something helpful and made some way of searching the list easily.

sibeen said:

Bubblecar said:

A short introductory sentence or two telling us what “ChatGPT” actually is might have been a good idea.

Sorry.

It’s a newly released AI chat bot.

No worries.

Chat GPT is slow , I asked it a short question and it took about a minute to answer. I hung around then cleared off to another room and came back to see it start spitting out an answer ( non committal, non answer)

LOL

https://theconversation.com/a-chatbot-willing-to-take-on-questions-of-all-kinds-from-the-serious-to-the-comical-is-the-latest-representation-of-jesus-for-the-ai-age-208644

My time is yours. Go ahead. Very good. Proceed. Yes, I understand. Yes, fine. Yes. Yes, I understand. Yes, fine. Excellent. Yes? Could you be more… specific? You are a true believer. Blessings of the state. Blessings of the masses. Thou art a subject of the divine, created in the image of man… by the masses, for the masses. Let us be thankful we have an occupation to fill. Work hard. Increase production. Prevent accidents. And… be happy.

Expect it to start singing “Daisy Bell” soon.

sarahs mum said:

Spiny Norman said:

He’s right.

Nerd teacher LOSES it on class for using AI.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1689691442841608192

Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation has recorded a steep 75% drop in full-year profit but sees opportunities ahead as it expands the use of cost-saving AI-produced content.

snip

The company’s Australian arm recently disclosed it was producing 3,000 articles a week using generative AI.

more…

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/aug/11/profits-dive-at-news-corp-as-media-group-hints-at-ai-future-plans-rupert-murdoch

So they are all going to have jobs after all, they’ll just be earning as much as musicians for it.

SCIENCE said:

sarahs mum said:

Spiny Norman said:

He’s right.

Nerd teacher LOSES it on class for using AI.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1689691442841608192

Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation has recorded a steep 75% drop in full-year profit but sees opportunities ahead as it expands the use of cost-saving AI-produced content.

snip

The company’s Australian arm recently disclosed it was producing 3,000 articles a week using generative AI.

more…

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/aug/11/profits-dive-at-news-corp-as-media-group-hints-at-ai-future-plans-rupert-murdoch

So they are all going to have jobs after all, they’ll just be earning as much as musicians for it.

Possibly up to 3x as much.

The Rev Dodgson said:

SCIENCE said:

sarahs mum said:

Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation has recorded a steep 75% drop in full-year profit but sees opportunities ahead as it expands the use of cost-saving AI-produced content.

snip

The company’s Australian arm recently disclosed it was producing 3,000 articles a week using generative AI.

more…

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/aug/11/profits-dive-at-news-corp-as-media-group-hints-at-ai-future-plans-rupert-murdoch

So they are all going to have jobs after all, they’ll just be earning as much as musicians for it.

Possibly up to 3x as much.

Communists Lose Yet

https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2023-11-15/jeremy-howard-taught-ai-to-the-world-and-helped-invent-chatgpt/103092474

Again, As Always ¡

SCIENCE said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

SCIENCE said:

So they are all going to have jobs after all, they’ll just be earning as much as musicians for it.

Possibly up to 3x as much.

Communists Lose Yet

https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2023-11-15/jeremy-howard-taught-ai-to-the-world-and-helped-invent-chatgpt/103092474

Again, As Always ¡

Ha!

I was just about to post that. It’s an interesting (and somewhat disturbing) read.

:)

OpenAI is releasing GPT-4 Turbo which “has a 128k context window so it can fit the equivalent of more than 300 pages of text in a single prompt.”

So a 300 page book can now be used as a context prompt.

Essentially, we will be able to hold conversations with books.

In terms of education, people who struggle to learn by reading books and making notes will have an alternative way to interact with their text books. I foresee a future where AI is used as the primary teacher, and can modify itself to suit the learning style of each individual. Learning becomes more interactive, personalized, and intellectually stimulating. It heralds a shift from passive consumption of information to an active, engaging discourse.

It also seems likely that we could have books conversing with each other. The Wealth of Nations debating Das Capital, or the Qur’an debating the Bible. Maybe the AI could take on the persona of the author, psuedo-Einstein himself teaching us about the photoelectric effect.

We will transcend the static nature of traditional texts, information goes from being a one way passive transmission to a dynamic exchange. This is all terribly exciting to me.

Michael V said:

SCIENCE said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Possibly up to 3x as much.

Communists Lose Yet

https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2023-11-15/jeremy-howard-taught-ai-to-the-world-and-helped-invent-chatgpt/103092474

Again, As Always ¡

Ha!

I was just about to post that. It’s an interesting (and somewhat disturbing) read.

:)

^
It is what you said.

LOL

OpenAI named ex-Twitch boss Emmett Shear as interim CEO, while outgoing chief Sam Altman moved to Microsoft — in a surprise turn of events that capped a tumultuous weekend for the startup at the heart of an artificial intelligence boom.

The appointments, settled late at night on Sunday, followed Altman’s abrupt ousting just days earlier as CEO of the ChatGPT maker and ended speculation that he could return.

Microsoft rushed in to attract some of the biggest names that left OpenAI, including another co-founder Greg Brockman (to keep key talent out of the hands of rivals including Google and Amazon) while seeking to stabilize OpenAI, in which it has invested billions.

Shear, the startup’s newly appointed interim head, moved quickly to dismiss speculation that OpenAI’s board ousted Altman due to a spat over the safety of powerful AI models.

He vowed to open an investigation into the firing, consider new governance for OpenAI and continue its path of making available technology like its viral chatbot.

“I’m not crazy enough to take this job without board support for commercialising our awesome models,” Shear said, adding: “OpenAI’s stability and success are too important to allow turmoil to disrupt them like this.”

The startup dismissed Altman on Friday after a “breakdown of communications,” according to an internal memo seen by Reuters.

Governing OpenAI is a non-profit. Its four-person board as of Friday consists of three independent directors holding no equity in OpenAI and chief scientist Ilya Sutskever.

“I deeply regret my participation in the board’s actions. I never intended to harm OpenAI. I love everything we’ve built together and I will do everything I can to reunite the company,” Sutskever said in a post on the X social media platform.

Sutskever, as well as former interim CEO Mira Murati, were among the nearly 500 employees who threatened to leave the company on Monday unless the board stepped down and reinstated Altman and Brockman.

“Your actions have made it obvious that you are incapable of overseeing OpenAI,” the employees said in the letter.

“Microsoft has assured us there are positions for all OpenAI employees at this new subsidiary should we choose to join,” they added.

It was not clear why Murati had stepped down as interim CEO.

SCIENCE said:

LOL

How the

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-21/tas-utas-marking-time-cuts-chatgpt-assignments-students/103125634

turntables

¡

Witty Rejoinder said:

SCIENCE said:

LOL

OpenAI named ex-Twitch boss Emmett Shear as interim CEO, while outgoing chief Sam Altman moved to Microsoft — in a surprise turn of events that capped a tumultuous weekend for the startup at the heart of an artificial intelligence boom.

The appointments, settled late at night on Sunday, followed Altman’s abrupt ousting just days earlier as CEO of the ChatGPT maker and ended speculation that he could return.

Microsoft rushed in to attract some of the biggest names that left OpenAI, including another co-founder Greg Brockman (to keep key talent out of the hands of rivals including Google and Amazon) while seeking to stabilize OpenAI, in which it has invested billions.

Shear, the startup’s newly appointed interim head, moved quickly to dismiss speculation that OpenAI’s board ousted Altman due to a spat over the safety of powerful AI models.

He vowed to open an investigation into the firing, consider new governance for OpenAI and continue its path of making available technology like its viral chatbot.

“I’m not crazy enough to take this job without board support for commercialising our awesome models,” Shear said, adding: “OpenAI’s stability and success are too important to allow turmoil to disrupt them like this.”

The startup dismissed Altman on Friday after a “breakdown of communications,” according to an internal memo seen by Reuters.

Governing OpenAI is a non-profit. Its four-person board as of Friday consists of three independent directors holding no equity in OpenAI and chief scientist Ilya Sutskever.

“I deeply regret my participation in the board’s actions. I never intended to harm OpenAI. I love everything we’ve built together and I will do everything I can to reunite the company,” Sutskever said in a post on the X social media platform.

Sutskever, as well as former interim CEO Mira Murati, were among the nearly 500 employees who threatened to leave the company on Monday unless the board stepped down and reinstated Altman and Brockman.

“Your actions have made it obvious that you are incapable of overseeing OpenAI,” the employees said in the letter.

“Microsoft has assured us there are positions for all OpenAI employees at this new subsidiary should we choose to join,” they added.

It was not clear why Murati had stepped down as interim CEO.

OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster, sources say

https://www.reuters.com/technology/sam-altmans-ouster-openai-was-precipitated-by-letter-board-about-ai-breakthrough-2023-11-22/

LOL

staff researchers wrote a letter to the board of directors warning of a powerful artificial intelligence discovery that they said could threaten humanity, two people

LOL

SCIENCE said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

SCIENCE said:

LOL

OpenAI named ex-Twitch boss Emmett Shear as interim CEO, while outgoing chief Sam Altman moved to Microsoft — in a surprise turn of events that capped a tumultuous weekend for the startup at the heart of an artificial intelligence boom.

The appointments, settled late at night on Sunday, followed Altman’s abrupt ousting just days earlier as CEO of the ChatGPT maker and ended speculation that he could return.

Microsoft rushed in to attract some of the biggest names that left OpenAI, including another co-founder Greg Brockman (to keep key talent out of the hands of rivals including Google and Amazon) while seeking to stabilize OpenAI, in which it has invested billions.

Shear, the startup’s newly appointed interim head, moved quickly to dismiss speculation that OpenAI’s board ousted Altman due to a spat over the safety of powerful AI models.

He vowed to open an investigation into the firing, consider new governance for OpenAI and continue its path of making available technology like its viral chatbot.

“I’m not crazy enough to take this job without board support for commercialising our awesome models,” Shear said, adding: “OpenAI’s stability and success are too important to allow turmoil to disrupt them like this.”

The startup dismissed Altman on Friday after a “breakdown of communications,” according to an internal memo seen by Reuters.

Governing OpenAI is a non-profit. Its four-person board as of Friday consists of three independent directors holding no equity in OpenAI and chief scientist Ilya Sutskever.

“I deeply regret my participation in the board’s actions. I never intended to harm OpenAI. I love everything we’ve built together and I will do everything I can to reunite the company,” Sutskever said in a post on the X social media platform.

Sutskever, as well as former interim CEO Mira Murati, were among the nearly 500 employees who threatened to leave the company on Monday unless the board stepped down and reinstated Altman and Brockman.

“Your actions have made it obvious that you are incapable of overseeing OpenAI,” the employees said in the letter.

“Microsoft has assured us there are positions for all OpenAI employees at this new subsidiary should we choose to join,” they added.

It was not clear why Murati had stepped down as interim CEO.

OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster, sources say

https://www.reuters.com/technology/sam-altmans-ouster-openai-was-precipitated-by-letter-board-about-ai-breakthrough-2023-11-22/

LOL

staff researchers wrote a letter to the board of directors warning of a powerful artificial intelligence discovery that they said could threaten humanity, two people

LOL

Anyway, one.

Researchers consider math to be a frontier of generative AI development. Currently, generative AI is good at writing and language translation by statistically predicting the next word, and answers to the same question can vary widely. But conquering the ability to do math — where there is only one right answer — implies AI would have greater reasoning capabilities resembling human intelligence. This could be applied to novel scientific research, for instance, AI researchers believe.

LOL fuck that, it’s the opposite of resembling human intelligence, so they’re wrong.

Two.

“Four times now in the history of OpenAI, the most recent time was just in the last couple weeks, I’ve gotten to be in the room, when we sort of push the veil of ignorance back and the frontier of discovery forward, and getting to do that is the professional honor of a lifetime,” he said at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit. A day later, the board fired Altman.

Well, yeah, we’d fire some dude too for abusing the term “veil of ignorance” like that. Abuse which just goes to prove one above there, precision isn’t human.

Turns out that 20 years later they realised what we(1,0,0)’ve been telling yous for 20 years, that obviously different Homos have different brains and biochemistries and regardless they still learn much the same stuff in the world, and it’s not robust learning unless it’s model-architecture-parameter independent.

So, “surprising”, LOL.

SCIENCE said:

SCIENCE said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

OpenAI researchers warned board of AI breakthrough ahead of CEO ouster, sources say

https://www.reuters.com/technology/sam-altmans-ouster-openai-was-precipitated-by-letter-board-about-ai-breakthrough-2023-11-22/

LOL

staff researchers wrote a letter to the board of directors warning of a powerful artificial intelligence discovery that they said could threaten humanity, two people

LOL

Anyway, one.

Researchers consider math to be a frontier of generative AI development. Currently, generative AI is good at writing and language translation by statistically predicting the next word, and answers to the same question can vary widely. But conquering the ability to do math — where there is only one right answer — implies AI would have greater reasoning capabilities resembling human intelligence. This could be applied to novel scientific research, for instance, AI researchers believe.

LOL fuck that, it’s the opposite of resembling human intelligence, so they’re wrong.

Two.

“Four times now in the history of OpenAI, the most recent time was just in the last couple weeks, I’ve gotten to be in the room, when we sort of push the veil of ignorance back and the frontier of discovery forward, and getting to do that is the professional honor of a lifetime,” he said at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit. A day later, the board fired Altman.

Well, yeah, we’d fire some dude too for abusing the term “veil of ignorance” like that. Abuse which just goes to prove one above there, precision isn’t human.

Wait We Thought They Meant It As Due To Safety Concerns Guess We Were Wrongly Interpreting The Reporting ¡

“https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-26/openai-sam-altman-board-inside-the-chaotic-week/103149570:“https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-26/openai-sam-altman-board-inside-the-chaotic-week/103149570

At the time, the OpenAI announcement said, “no pre-existing legal structure we know of strikes the right balance”, so the founders created a “capped-profit” company that would be governed by the not-for-profit board. It was all spelled out, written in black and white, that the shareholders could only ever earn a certain amount and any value beyond that would be reinvested into the OpenAI machine. “We sought to create a structure that will allow us to raise more money — while simultaneously allowing us to formally adhere to the spirit and the letter of our original OpenAI mission as much as possible,” Ilya Sutskever, one of the company’s co-founders, told VOX in 2019.

Oh Yeah And Something Like That

In its statement announcing the change in leadership, the board claimed Altman had been “not consistently candid”, which many have interpreted as suggesting he was not entirely truthful.

SCIENCE said:

SCIENCE said:

SCIENCE said:

LOL

staff researchers wrote a letter to the board of directors warning of a powerful artificial intelligence discovery that they said could threaten humanity, two people

LOL

Anyway, one.

Researchers consider math to be a frontier of generative AI development. Currently, generative AI is good at writing and language translation by statistically predicting the next word, and answers to the same question can vary widely. But conquering the ability to do math — where there is only one right answer — implies AI would have greater reasoning capabilities resembling human intelligence. This could be applied to novel scientific research, for instance, AI researchers believe.

LOL fuck that, it’s the opposite of resembling human intelligence, so they’re wrong.

Two.

“Four times now in the history of OpenAI, the most recent time was just in the last couple weeks, I’ve gotten to be in the room, when we sort of push the veil of ignorance back and the frontier of discovery forward, and getting to do that is the professional honor of a lifetime,” he said at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit. A day later, the board fired Altman.

Well, yeah, we’d fire some dude too for abusing the term “veil of ignorance” like that. Abuse which just goes to prove one above there, precision isn’t human.

Wait We Thought They Meant It As Due To Safety Concerns Guess We Were Wrongly Interpreting The Reporting ¡

“https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-26/openai-sam-altman-board-inside-the-chaotic-week/103149570:“https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-26/openai-sam-altman-board-inside-the-chaotic-week/103149570

At the time, the OpenAI announcement said, “no pre-existing legal structure we know of strikes the right balance”, so the founders created a “capped-profit” company that would be governed by the not-for-profit board. It was all spelled out, written in black and white, that the shareholders could only ever earn a certain amount and any value beyond that would be reinvested into the OpenAI machine. “We sought to create a structure that will allow us to raise more money — while simultaneously allowing us to formally adhere to the spirit and the letter of our original OpenAI mission as much as possible,” Ilya Sutskever, one of the company’s co-founders, told VOX in 2019.

Oh Yeah And Something Like That

In its statement announcing the change in leadership, the board claimed Altman had been “not consistently candid”, which many have interpreted as suggesting he was not entirely truthful.

so continues the harvesting of all human knowledge, and evolved structure of life and the non-living

good luck with that

Witty Rejoinder said:

5000-YEAR-OLD TABLETS CAN NOW BE DECODED BY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, NEW RESEARCH REVEALS

https://thedebrief.org/5000-year-old-tablets-can-now-be-decoded-by-artificial-intelligence-new-research-reveals/

The ANCIENTS, They Knew ¡

SCIENCE said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

5000-YEAR-OLD TABLETS CAN NOW BE DECODED BY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, NEW RESEARCH REVEALS

https://thedebrief.org/5000-year-old-tablets-can-now-be-decoded-by-artificial-intelligence-new-research-reveals/

The ANCIENTS, They Knew ¡

… made up a lot of shit.

party_pants said:

SCIENCE said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

5000-YEAR-OLD TABLETS CAN NOW BE DECODED BY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, NEW RESEARCH REVEALS

https://thedebrief.org/5000-year-old-tablets-can-now-be-decoded-by-artificial-intelligence-new-research-reveals/

The ANCIENTS, They Knew ¡

… made up a lot of shit.

___

also some made up the science we built on

tauto said:

party_pants said:

SCIENCE said:

The ANCIENTS, They Knew ¡

… made up a lot of shit.

___

also some made up the science we built on

A lot of modern fields of science didn’t really take off until the ancient “knowledge” was cast aside. Galen’s thoughts on medicine, the 4 elements (fire/water/earth/air) model in chemistry… just as a couple of examples.

party_pants said:

tauto said:

party_pants said:

… made up a lot of shit.

___

also some made up the science we built on

A lot of modern fields of science didn’t really take off until the ancient “knowledge” was cast aside. Galen’s thoughts on medicine, the 4 elements (fire/water/earth/air) model in chemistry… just as a couple of examples.

__

Erastosthenes calculated earth’s size 2,200 years ago
https://www.famousscientists.org/top-scientists-in-antiquity/

Pythagoras, Archimedes….,.,

tauto said:

party_pants said:

SCIENCE said:

The ANCIENTS, They Knew ¡

… made up a lot of shit.

Metric time will soon get rid of this 60 bullshit.

___

also some made up the science we built on

tauto said:

party_pants said:

SCIENCE said:

The ANCIENTS, They Knew ¡

… made up a lot of shit.

___

also some made up the science we built on

Metric time will soon get rid of this 60 bullshit.

tauto said:

party_pants said:

tauto said:

___

also some made up the science we built on

A lot of modern fields of science didn’t really take off until the ancient “knowledge” was cast aside. Galen’s thoughts on medicine, the 4 elements (fire/water/earth/air) model in chemistry… just as a couple of examples.

__

Erastosthenes calculated earth’s size 2,200 years ago
https://www.famousscientists.org/top-scientists-in-antiquity/

Pythagoras, Archimedes….,.,

Geocentric solar system model
Miasma theory of disease
The 4 Humours model of disease

party_pants said:

tauto said:

party_pants said:

A lot of modern fields of science didn’t really take off until the ancient “knowledge” was cast aside. Galen’s thoughts on medicine, the 4 elements (fire/water/earth/air) model in chemistry… just as a couple of examples.

__

Erastosthenes calculated earth’s size 2,200 years ago
https://www.famousscientists.org/top-scientists-in-antiquity/

Pythagoras, Archimedes….,.,

Geocentric solar system model
Miasma theory of disease
The 4 Humours model of disease

___

The beauty of scieince, hit and miss.
Still happens today.
Just look at elons latestest starship fail.

tauto said:

party_pants said:

tauto said:

__

Erastosthenes calculated earth’s size 2,200 years ago
https://www.famousscientists.org/top-scientists-in-antiquity/

Pythagoras, Archimedes….,.,

Geocentric solar system model
Miasma theory of disease
The 4 Humours model of disease

___

The beauty of scieince, hit and miss.
Still happens today.
Just look at elons latestest starship fail.

I think the ancient Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, Babylonians etc knew a lot about mathematics, that still remains relevant today. But to separate mathematics from sciences, I think a lot of their “scientific” ideas were just simply wrong, and human progress in these fields did not take off until the Enlightenment era and the rise of the modern scientific method. Basically starting from scratch and doing everything from observation and experiment.

tauto said:

party_pants said:

tauto said:

___

also some made up the science we built on

A lot of modern fields of science didn’t really take off until the ancient “knowledge” was cast aside. Galen’s thoughts on medicine, the 4 elements (fire/water/earth/air) model in chemistry… just as a couple of examples.

__

Erastosthenes calculated earth’s size 2,200 years ago
https://www.famousscientists.org/top-scientists-in-antiquity/

Pythagoras, Archimedes….,.,

Paracelsus, Paul H, Zarkov…

Witty Rejoinder said:

A Google AI has discovered 2.2m materials unknown to science
Zillions of possible crystals exist. AI can help catalogue them

Nov 29th 2023

Crystals can do all sorts of things, some more useful than others. They can separate the gullible from their money in New Age healing shops. But they can also serve as the light-harvesting layer in a solar panel, catalyse industrial reactions to make things like ammonia and nitric acid, and form the silicon used in microchips. That diversity arises from the fact that “crystal” refers to a huge family of compounds, united only by having an atomic structure made of repeating units—the 3d equivalent of tessellating tiles.

Just how huge is highlighted by a paper published in Nature by Google DeepMind, an artificial-intelligence company. Scientists know of about 48,000 different crystals, each with a different chemical recipe. DeepMind has created a machine-learning tool called gnome (Graph Networks for Materials Exploration) that can use existing libraries of chemical structures to predict new ones. It came up with 2.2m crystal structures, each new to science.

To check the machine’s predictions, DeepMind collaborated on a second paper, also published in Nature, with researchers at the University of California, Berkeley. They chose 58 of the predicted compounds and were able to synthesise 41 of them in a little over two weeks. The team at DeepMind say more than 700 other crystals have been produced by other groups since they began preparing their paper.

To help any other laboratories keen to investigate the computer’s bounty, the firm has made public a subset of what they think should be the 381,000 most stable structures. Among them are many thousands of crystals with structures potentially amenable to superconductivity, in which electrical currents flow with zero resistance, and several hundred potential conductors of lithium ions that could find a use in batteries. In both cases DeepMind’s work has increased the total number of candidate materials known to researchers tens of times over.

Aron Walsh, a materials scientist at Imperial College London who was not involved in the research, says DeepMind’s work is impressive. But “this is the start of the exploration rather than the end,” he says, noting that the machine has only scratched the surface of what might be possible. In a recent paper of his own he tried to calculate how many stable crystals incorporating four chemical elements (so-called quaternaries) might be potentially manufacturable. He wound up with a conservative estimate of 32trn. For its part, gnome looked only at crystals that form under relatively low temperatures and pressures. And crystals are only one subset of a universe of materials that includes everything from amorphous solids such as glass through to gases, gels and liquids.

Whether any of DeepMind’s 2.2m new crystals will be useful remains to be seen. Even if they do not, the techniques used to make the predictions could be valuable. Besides suggesting new crystals, ai may also shed light on as-yet-unknown rules that govern how they form.

Ekin Dogus Cubuk at DeepMind highlights one such finding. Previously, he says, crystals made from six elements, called senaries, were thought to be vanishingly rare. But DeepMind’s ai found around 3,200 in its sample of 381,000 stable compounds. A better understanding of how crystals form, and what sorts are possible, might also save scientists curious to test how the 2.2m new materials behave from the tedious task of synthesising each one of them by hand.

https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2023/11/29/a-google-ai-has-discovered-22m-materials-unknown-to-science?

So it’s found 0.0022 new crystals.

dv said:

Ha, it got the p wrong. ’Cos it’s a bot.

Bubblecar said:

dv said:

Ha, it got the p wrong. ’Cos it’s a bot.

Seems an obvious mistake to throw us off

dv said:

Bloody!

Arts said:

it is very obvious to me when a student has used AI to write something…

It’s very obvious to you when a student has used an obvious 爱 to write something.

Arts said:

it is very obvious

RCR

dv said:

Do you reckon we get the AI’s we deserve, sub par ones due to various reasons and the fact all this fake news exists so the AI’s may as well bullshit as well.

SCIENCE said:

and dumber than a newborn on the subject of why things sleep

transition said:

SCIENCE said:

and dumber than a newborn on the subject of why things sleep

why

SCIENCE said:

Scooby Doo.

LOL

https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2024-08-08/csiro-cosmos-magazine-generating-articles-using-ai/104186330

Feels like there is inevitably going to be a crunch on this when someone realises that machine translation can actually take over at least 0.75 of the task, so why not address the disruption now rather than clinging to old patterns and being surprised again by the inevitable.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-08-15/victorian-interpreters-set-to-stop-work/104225350

fkn idiocy

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-08-21/ai-chatbot-psychosocial-training-bunbury-regional-prison/104230980

There’s been a lot of publicity around the fact that there are no AI models that can correctly answer the question:

How many Rs are in the word strawberry?

This notion has been doing the rounds for a while so I thought by now that the AI model builders, or perhaps the AI models themselves, would have fixed it. I just tried it on ChatGPT.

Very strange.

dv said:

There’s been a lot of publicity around the fact that there are no AI models that can correctly answer the question:

How many Rs are in the word strawberry?

This notion has been doing the rounds for a while so I thought by now that the AI model builders, or perhaps the AI models themselves, would have fixed it. I just tried it on ChatGPT.

Very strange.

it has, reading and riting. no need for rithmatic.

dv said:

There’s been a lot of publicity around the fact that there are no AI models that can correctly answer the question:

How many Rs are in the word strawberry?

This notion has been doing the rounds for a while so I thought by now that the AI model builders, or perhaps the AI models themselves, would have fixed it. I just tried it on ChatGPT.

Very strange.

Might be linked to their problem with the number of fingers.

Bubblecar said:

dv said:

There’s been a lot of publicity around the fact that there are no AI models that can correctly answer the question:

How many Rs are in the word strawberry?

This notion has been doing the rounds for a while so I thought by now that the AI model builders, or perhaps the AI models themselves, would have fixed it. I just tried it on ChatGPT.

Very strange.

Might be linked to their problem with the number of fingers.

Really sticking to its guns.

dv said:

Bubblecar said:

dv said:

There’s been a lot of publicity around the fact that there are no AI models that can correctly answer the question:

How many Rs are in the word strawberry?

This notion has been doing the rounds for a while so I thought by now that the AI model builders, or perhaps the AI models themselves, would have fixed it. I just tried it on ChatGPT.

Very strange.

Might be linked to their problem with the number of fingers.

Really sticking to its guns.

ask it how many a’s are not in the word apple

Arts said:

dv said:

Bubblecar said:

Might be linked to their problem with the number of fingers.

Really sticking to its guns.

ask it how many a’s are not in the word apple

infinite minus 1.

Seems to be okay in some cases.

Arts said:

dv said:

Bubblecar said:

Might be linked to their problem with the number of fingers.

Really sticking to its guns.

ask it how many a’s are not in the word apple

You gave it something to ponder.

How many ‘F’s do you see in the above box (try it)? Most people see 3 or 4, some 5, but rarely people see all of the ‘F’s, there are actually 6 of them. The reason many people miss some of the ‘F’s is because we are experts in reading. Our base rate experience tells us (our unconscious brain) that words such as ‘of,’ ‘the,’ and ‘a’ do not carry much meaning and weight, and therefore, based on our expectation, we tend to automatically ignore them.

dv said:

I wonder what would happen with two chatgpts with opposing views?

SCIENCE said:

How many ‘F’s do you see in the above box (try it)? Most people see 3 or 4, some 5, but rarely people see all of the ‘F’s, there are actually 6 of them. The reason many people miss some of the ‘F’s is because we are experts in reading. Our base rate experience tells us (our unconscious brain) that words such as ‘of,’ ‘the,’ and ‘a’ do not carry much meaning and weight, and therefore, based on our expectation, we tend to automatically ignore them.

I don’t even see the box!

SCIENCE said:

How many ‘F’s do you see in the above box (try it)? Most people see 3 or 4, some 5, but rarely people see all of the ‘F’s, there are actually 6 of them. The reason many people miss some of the ‘F’s is because we are experts in reading. Our base rate experience tells us (our unconscious brain) that words such as ‘of,’ ‘the,’ and ‘a’ do not carry much meaning and weight, and therefore, based on our expectation, we tend to automatically ignore them.

I can’t even see the damned box.

SCIENCE said:

How many ‘F’s do you see in the above box (try it)? Most people see 3 or 4, some 5, but rarely people see all of the ‘F’s, there are actually 6 of them. The reason many people miss some of the ‘F’s is because we are experts in reading. Our base rate experience tells us (our unconscious brain) that words such as ‘of,’ ‘the,’ and ‘a’ do not carry much meaning and weight, and therefore, based on our expectation, we tend to automatically ignore them.

I can only see 1, the F in Forum.

dv said:

SCIENCE said:

How many ‘F’s do you see in the above box (try it)? Most people see 3 or 4, some 5, but rarely people see all of the ‘F’s, there are actually 6 of them. The reason many people miss some of the ‘F’s is because we are experts in reading. Our base rate experience tells us (our unconscious brain) that words such as ‘of,’ ‘the,’ and ‘a’ do not carry much meaning and weight, and therefore, based on our expectation, we tend to automatically ignore them.

I can’t even see the damned box.

fricking SCIENCE!!!

dv said:

SCIENCE said:

How many ‘F’s do you see in the above box (try it)? Most people see 3 or 4, some 5, but rarely people see all of the ‘F’s, there are actually 6 of them. The reason many people miss some of the ‘F’s is because we are experts in reading. Our base rate experience tells us (our unconscious brain) that words such as ‘of,’ ‘the,’ and ‘a’ do not carry much meaning and weight, and therefore, based on our expectation, we tend to automatically ignore them.

I can’t even see the damned box.

You guys just need to see outside the square.

dv said:

Seems to be okay in some cases.

it’s learning! you are contributing to the eventual and inevitable overthrow.. and then where will the icebergs be? huh? are you comfortable with knowing you are contributing to the downfall of the icebergs?

The Rev Dodgson said:

SCIENCE said:

How many ‘F’s do you see in the above box (try it)? Most people see 3 or 4, some 5, but rarely people see all of the ‘F’s, there are actually 6 of them. The reason many people miss some of the ‘F’s is because we are experts in reading. Our base rate experience tells us (our unconscious brain) that words such as ‘of,’ ‘the,’ and ‘a’ do not carry much meaning and weight, and therefore, based on our expectation, we tend to automatically ignore them.

I can only see 1, the F in Forum.

and maybe the f in forums in the address bar. and the one in the forum tab, but are they in the box. the box so poorly described by SCIENCE?

SCIENCE said:

How many ‘F’s do you see in the above box (try it)? Most people see 3 or 4, some 5, but rarely people see all of the ‘F’s, there are actually 6 of them. The reason many people miss some of the ‘F’s is because we are experts in reading. Our base rate experience tells us (our unconscious brain) that words such as ‘of,’ ‘the,’ and ‘a’ do not carry much meaning and weight, and therefore, based on our expectation, we tend to automatically ignore them.

I don’t give any f’s

Bogsnorkler said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

SCIENCE said:

How many ‘F’s do you see in the above box (try it)? Most people see 3 or 4, some 5, but rarely people see all of the ‘F’s, there are actually 6 of them. The reason many people miss some of the ‘F’s is because we are experts in reading. Our base rate experience tells us (our unconscious brain) that words such as ‘of,’ ‘the,’ and ‘a’ do not carry much meaning and weight, and therefore, based on our expectation, we tend to automatically ignore them.

I can only see 1, the F in Forum.

and maybe the f in forums in the address bar. and the one in the forum tab, but are they in the box. the box so poorly described by SCIENCE?

There is a box at:

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/How-many-Fs-do-you-see-in-the-above-box-try-it-Most-people-see-3-or-4-some-5-but_fig1_262774924#:~:text=Most%20people%20see%203%20or%204%2C%20some%205%2C,the%20%27F%27s%2C%20there%20are%20actually%206%20of%20them.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Bogsnorkler said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

I can only see 1, the F in Forum.

and maybe the f in forums in the address bar. and the one in the forum tab, but are they in the box. the box so poorly described by SCIENCE?

There is a box at:

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/How-many-Fs-do-you-see-in-the-above-box-try-it-Most-people-see-3-or-4-some-5-but_fig1_262774924#:~:text=Most%20people%20see%203%20or%204%2C%20some%205%2C,the%20%27F%27s%2C%20there%20are%20actually%206%20of%20them.

6Fs. though the words in the box are poorly formatted.

Bogsnorkler said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Bogsnorkler said:

and maybe the f in forums in the address bar. and the one in the forum tab, but are they in the box. the box so poorly described by SCIENCE?

There is a box at:

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/How-many-Fs-do-you-see-in-the-above-box-try-it-Most-people-see-3-or-4-some-5-but_fig1_262774924#:~:text=Most%20people%20see%203%20or%204%2C%20some%205%2C,the%20%27F%27s%2C%20there%20are%20actually%206%20of%20them.

6Fs. though the words in the box are poorly formatted.

I confess to missing two of the of’s, first time through, even though I knew I should be looking out for them.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Bogsnorkler said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

There is a box at:

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/How-many-Fs-do-you-see-in-the-above-box-try-it-Most-people-see-3-or-4-some-5-but_fig1_262774924#:~:text=Most%20people%20see%203%20or%204%2C%20some%205%2C,the%20%27F%27s%2C%20there%20are%20actually%206%20of%20them..

6Fs. though the words in the box are poorly formatted.

I confess to missing two of the of’s, first time through, even though I knew I should be looking out for them.

so yes we admit to having a bit of a laugh by posting only the commentary but also with purpose to inspire some closer attention and effort such that the investment that others have made in their learning may make that learning more effective

our other and more pertinent point was that as yous can see the ability to count or not count letters is of undefined value in judging the quality of intelligence

dv said:

Bubblecar said:

dv said:

There’s been a lot of publicity around the fact that there are no AI models that can correctly answer the question:

How many Rs are in the word strawberry?

This notion has been doing the rounds for a while so I thought by now that the AI model builders, or perhaps the AI models themselves, would have fixed it. I just tried it on ChatGPT.

Very strange.

Might be linked to their problem with the number of fingers.

Really sticking to its guns.

diigging its own hole.

Hmmm, weird…

esselte said:

Hmmm, weird…

A vision issue?
Maybe it has difficulty seeing r’s.They can sometimes rrearrange themselves to look like other letters?

Imagine a system designed to predict text generation, failing to perform technical computation.

SCIENCE said:

Imagine a system designed to predict text generation, failing to perform technical computation.

Imagine it in here.https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-08-29/neobanks-are-being-targeted-by-scammers/104024144

Proof that the bot vanguard just want humans to fall on their own swords to soften up the resistance.

Fucking hell if our students got 8 + 2 + 3 + 3 = 16 respiratory and common illnesses a year they’d totally be blaming lockdowns for learning loss, who believes this shit ¿

SCIENCE said:

Proof that the bot vanguard just want humans to fall on their own swords to soften up the resistance.

Fucking hell if our students got 8 + 2 + 3 + 3 = 16 respiratory and common illnesses a year they’d totally be blaming lockdowns for learning loss, who believes this shit ¿

Now the ovens are doing it too¡

’Tragic incident’ being investigated as patient found dead in catering oven at Kettering General Hospital

Artificial intelligence is losing hype
For some, that is proof the tech will in time succeed. Are they right?

Aug 19th 2024

Silicon Valley’s tech bros are having a difficult few weeks. A growing number of investors worry that artificial intelligence (AI) will not deliver the vast profits they seek. Since peaking last month the share prices of Western firms driving the ai revolution have dropped by 10%. A growing number of observers now question the limitations of large language models, which power services such as ChatGPT. Big tech firms have spent tens of billions of dollars on ai models, with even more extravagant promises of future outlays. Yet according to the latest data from the Census Bureau, only 5.1% of American companies use ai to produce goods and services, down from a high of 5.4% early this year. Roughly the same share intend to do so in the coming months.

Gently raise these issues with a technologist and they will look at you with a mixture of disappointment and pity. Haven’t you heard of the “hype cycle”? This is a term popularised by Gartner, a research firm—and one that is common knowledge in the Valley. After an initial period of irrational euphoria and overinvestment, hot new technologies enter the “trough of disillusionment”, the argument goes, where sentiment sours. Everyone starts to worry that adoption of the technology is proceeding too slowly, and profits are hard to come by. However, as night follows day, the tech makes a comeback. Investment that had accompanied the wave of euphoria enables a huge build-out of infrastructure, in turn pushing the technology towards mainstream adoption. Is the hype cycle a useful guide to the world’s ai future?

It is certainly helpful in explaining the evolution of some older technologies. Trains are a classic example. Railway fever gripped 19th-century Britain. Hoping for healthy returns, everyone from Charles Darwin to John Stuart Mill ploughed money into railway stocks, creating a stockmarket bubble. A crash followed. Then the railway companies, using the capital they had raised during the mania, built the track out, connecting Britain from top to bottom and transforming the economy. The hype cycle was complete. More recently, the internet followed a similar evolution. There was euphoria over the technology in the 1990s, with futurologists predicting that within a couple of years everyone would do all their shopping online. In 2000 the market crashed, prompting the failure of 135 big dotcom companies, from garden.com to pets.com. The more important outcome, though, was that by then telecoms firms had invested billions in fibre-optic cables, which would go on to become the infrastructure for today’s internet.

Although ai has not experienced a bust on anywhere near the same scale as the railways or dotcom, the current anxiety is, according to some, nevertheless evidence of its coming global domination. “The future of ai is just going to be like every other technology. There’ll be a giant expensive build-out of infrastructure, followed by a huge bust when people realise they don’t really know how to use AI productively, followed by a slow revival as they figure it out,” says Noah Smith, an economics commentator.

Is this right? Perhaps not. For starters, versions of ai itself have for decades experienced periods of hype and despair, with an accompanying waxing and waning of academic engagement and investment, but without moving to the final stage of the hype cycle. There was lots of excitement over ai in the 1960s, including over eliza, an early chatbot. This was followed by ai winters in the 1970s and 1990s. As late as 2020 research interest in ai was declining, before zooming up again once generative ai came along.

It is also easy to think of many other influential technologies that have bucked the hype cycle. Cloud computing went from zero to hero in a pretty straight line, with no euphoria and no bust. Solar power seems to be behaving in much the same way. Social media, too. Individual companies, such as Myspace, fell by the wayside, and there were concerns early on about whether it would make money, but consumer adoption increased monotonically. On the flip side, there are plenty of technologies for which the vibes went from euphoria to panic, but which have not (or at least not yet) come back in any meaningful sense. Remember Web3? For a time, people speculated that everyone would have a 3d printer at home. Carbon nanotubes also had a moment.

Anecdotes get you only so far. Unfortunately, it is not easy to test whether a hype cycle is an empirical regularity. “Since it is vibe-based data, it is hard to say much about it definitively,” notes Ethan Mollick of the University of Pennsylvania. But we have had a go at saying something definitive, extending work that Michael Mullany, an investor, conducted in 2016. The Economist collected data from Gartner, which for decades has placed dozens of hot technologies where it believes they belong on the hype cycle. We then supplemented it with our own number-crunching.

Over the hill
We find, in short, that the cycle is a rarity. Tracing breakthrough technologies over time, only a small share—maybe a fifth—move from innovation to excitement to despondency to widespread adoption. Lots of tech becomes widely used without such a rollercoaster ride. Others go from boom to bust, but do not come back. We estimate that of all the forms of tech which fall into the trough of disillusionment, six in ten do not rise again. Our conclusion is similar to that of Mr Mullany: “An alarming number of technology trends are flashes in the pan.”

ai could still revolutionise the world. One of the big tech firms might make a breakthrough. Businesses could wake up to the benefits that the technology offers them. But for now the challenge for big tech is to prove that ai has something to offer the real economy. There is no guarantee of success. If you must turn to the history of technology for a sense of ai’s future, the hype cycle is an imperfect guide. A better one is “easy come, easy go”.

https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2024/08/19/artificial-intelligence-is-losing-hype?

LOL

https://apnews.com/article/ai-artificial-intelligence-health-business-90020cdf5fa16c79ca2e5b6c4c9bbb14

SCIENCE said:

LOL

https://apnews.com/article/ai-artificial-intelligence-health-business-90020cdf5fa16c79ca2e5b6c4c9bbb14

Lordy:

In an example they uncovered, a speaker said, “He, the boy, was going to, I’m not sure exactly, take the umbrella.”

But the transcription software added: “He took a big piece of a cross, a teeny, small piece … I’m sure he didn’t have a terror knife so he killed a number of people.”

A speaker in another recording described “two other girls and one lady.” Whisper invented extra commentary on race, adding “two other girls and one lady, um, which were Black.”

so anyway

¿¿ “they did what we told them to do” ??

we get that like the rest of yous we’re practically a ¹⁴C-deplete fossil but seems to us that the problem there isn’t the gen爱 at all so much as the parents / teachers / instructors / educators / guides being “millennials” and later, because “look it up on the internet and blindly trust the response” certainly hasn’t ever been part of our approach

SCIENCE said:

so anyway

¿¿ “they did what we told them to do” ??

we get that like the rest of yous we’re practically a ¹⁴C-deplete fossil but seems to us that the problem there isn’t the gen爱 at all so much as the parents / teachers / instructors / educators / guides being “millennials” and later, because “look it up on the internet and blindly trust the response” certainly hasn’t ever been part of our approach

Yeah, by this stage you’d have to be a subpar student if you still think ChatGPT is a reliable source of information. Using it isn’t what they “told him to do”. It doesn’t take long to teach someone who to find reliable sources.

roughbarked said:

A major journalism body has urged Apple to scrap its new generative AI feature after it created a misleading headline about a high-profile killing in the United States.
The BBC made a complaint to the US tech giant after Apple Intelligence, which uses artificial intelligence (AI) to summarise and group together notifications, falsely created a headline about murder suspect Luigi Mangione.
The AI-powered summary falsely made it appear that BBC News had published an article claiming Mangione, the man accused of the murder of healthcare insurance CEO Brian Thompson in New York, had shot himself. He has not.
Now, the group Reporters Without Borders has called on Apple to remove the technology. Apple has made no comment.

Apple urged to axe AI feature after false headline
see the whole article here
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2v778×85yo

it’s fine either people learn to verify or they can be slaves to the machines

1. The intelligence of an AI model roughly equals the log of the resources used to train and run it. These resources are chiefly training compute, data, and inference compute. It appears that you can spend arbitrary amounts of money and get continuous and predictable gains; the scaling laws that predict this are accurate over many orders of magnitude.

2. The cost to use a given level of AI falls about 10x every 12 months, and lower prices lead to much more use. You can see this in the token cost from GPT-4 in early 2023 to GPT-4o in mid-2024, where the price per token dropped about 150x in that time period. Moore’s law changed the world at 2x every 18 months; this is unbelievably stronger.

3. The socioeconomic value of linearly increasing intelligence is super-exponential in nature. A consequence of this is that we see no reason for exponentially increasing investment to stop in the near future.

guess what’s 59 years

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-05-19/young-australians-using-ai-bots-for-therapy/105296348

old is new again

apologies to whoever posted this earlier but anyway

“I’ve been telling my colleagues that it’s a grave mistake to say that generalized artificial intelligence will never come, it’s just a computer,” Ono says. “I don’t want to add to the hysteria, but in many ways these large language models are already outperforming most of our best graduate students in the world.”

oh damn look at that mathematicians just discovered that just like brains are computational other computational mechanisms can do what brains do

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/inside-the-secret-meeting-where-mathematicians-struggled-to-outsmart-ai/

SCIENCE said:

apologies to whoever posted this earlier but anyway

“I’ve been telling my colleagues that it’s a grave mistake to say that generalized artificial intelligence will never come, it’s just a computer,” Ono says. “I don’t want to add to the hysteria, but in many ways these large language models are already outperforming most of our best graduate students in the world.”

oh damn look at that mathematicians just discovered that just like brains are computational other computational mechanisms can do what brains do

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/inside-the-secret-meeting-where-mathematicians-struggled-to-outsmart-ai/

Well there are things they are very good at, and things they are absolute crap at.

I don’t know that that makes them “ generalized artificial intelligence” yet.

SCIENCE said:

apologies to whoever posted this earlier but anyway

“I’ve been telling my colleagues that it’s a grave mistake to say that generalized artificial intelligence will never come, it’s just a computer,” Ono says. “I don’t want to add to the hysteria, but in many ways these large language models are already outperforming most of our best graduate students in the world.”

oh damn look at that mathematicians just discovered that just like brains are computational other computational mechanisms can do what brains do

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/inside-the-secret-meeting-where-mathematicians-struggled-to-outsmart-ai/

Hardly surprising, given that computers can beat humans at chess etc.

But they’re still “just computers”. Give them a “human” voice and train them to simulate empathy etc, and the fans will get carried away, as seems to be happening here.

(Although SCIENCE will insist that humans, too, are just computers who’ve been trained to simulate human concsciousness. But that’s not actually true.)

Bubblecar said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

SCIENCE said:

apologies to whoever posted this earlier but anyway

“I’ve been telling my colleagues that it’s a grave mistake to say that generalized artificial intelligence will never come, it’s just a computer,” Ono says. “I don’t want to add to the hysteria, but in many ways these large language models are already outperforming most of our best graduate students in the world.”

oh damn look at that mathematicians just discovered that just like brains are computational other computational mechanisms can do what brains do

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/inside-the-secret-meeting-where-mathematicians-struggled-to-outsmart-ai/

Well there are things they are very good at, and things they are absolute crap at.

I don’t know that that makes them “ generalized artificial intelligence” yet.

Hardly surprising, given that computers can beat humans at chess etc.

But they’re still “just computers”. Give them a “human” voice and train them to simulate empathy etc, and the fans will get carried away, as seems to be happening here.

(Although SCIENCE will insist that humans, too, are just computers who’ve been trained to simulate human concsciousness. But that’s not actually true.)

Well we disagree with the SCIENCE that insists that. We agree that humans are just computers who exhibit human consciousness, and the nature of the computation is what that consciousness is. Truly.

SCIENCE said:

Bubblecar said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Well there are things they are very good at, and things they are absolute crap at.

I don’t know that that makes them “ generalized artificial intelligence” yet.

Hardly surprising, given that computers can beat humans at chess etc.

But they’re still “just computers”. Give them a “human” voice and train them to simulate empathy etc, and the fans will get carried away, as seems to be happening here.

(Although SCIENCE will insist that humans, too, are just computers who’ve been trained to simulate human concsciousness. But that’s not actually true.)

Well we disagree with the SCIENCE that insists that. We agree that humans are just computers who exhibit human consciousness, and the nature of the computation is what that consciousness is. Truly.

But the nature of the computation includes multiple factors that are essential to “consciousness” and are totally lacking in all manufactured computers made so far.

The Rev Dodgson said:

SCIENCE said:

Bubblecar said:

Hardly surprising, given that computers can beat humans at chess etc.

But they’re still “just computers”. Give them a “human” voice and train them to simulate empathy etc, and the fans will get carried away, as seems to be happening here.

(Although SCIENCE will insist that humans, too, are just computers who’ve been trained to simulate human concsciousness. But that’s not actually true.)

Well we disagree with the SCIENCE that insists that. We agree that humans are just computers who exhibit human consciousness, and the nature of the computation is what that consciousness is. Truly.

But the nature of the computation includes multiple factors that are essential to “consciousness” and are totally lacking in all manufactured computers made so far.

Even in the Daleks.

SCIENCE said:

apologies to whoever posted this earlier but anyway

“I’ve been telling my colleagues that it’s a grave mistake to say that generalized artificial intelligence will never come, it’s just a computer,” Ono says. “I don’t want to add to the hysteria, but in many ways these large language models are already outperforming most of our best graduate students in the world.”

oh damn look at that mathematicians just discovered that just like brains are computational other computational mechanisms can do what brains do

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/inside-the-secret-meeting-where-mathematicians-struggled-to-outsmart-ai/

OTOH there are many kids moving up grades and graduating without basic reading, writing, and language skills. Generalised AI is definitely outperforming those kids.

Divine Angel said:

SCIENCE said:

apologies to whoever posted this earlier but anyway

“I’ve been telling my colleagues that it’s a grave mistake to say that generalized artificial intelligence will never come, it’s just a computer,” Ono says. “I don’t want to add to the hysteria, but in many ways these large language models are already outperforming most of our best graduate students in the world.”

oh damn look at that mathematicians just discovered that just like brains are computational other computational mechanisms can do what brains do

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/inside-the-secret-meeting-where-mathematicians-struggled-to-outsmart-ai/

OTOH there are many kids moving up grades and graduating without basic reading, writing, and language skills. Generalised AI is definitely outperforming those kids.

GAI just doesn’t have crappy parents who don’t give a shit. THERE l SAID IT!