3 ms·
I don't think its fair to call this raising the bar. I don't think anyone was imagining plausible yet nonsensical text to be the bar for AI. ChatGPT is incredi
by thethirdone 4y ago
I don't think its fair to call this raising the bar. I don't think anyone was imagining plausible yet nonsensical text to be the bar for AI.
ChatGPT is incredibly good at generating plausible text, but nearly all of the time it fails to hold up to detailed scrutiny. It writes like a human who doesn't know what they are talking about, but have chosen to bullshit something instead of admit they don't know.
At least for me, I would have expected more understanding to be necessary to get to ChatGPT levels of plausibility. I would not have expected a bot that does not understand two digit multiplication at all to be able to say anything vaguely convincing about primes, but ChatGPT can.
Being thoroughly surprised by how ML improves and then restating your expectations is not the same as raising the bar.
- dragonwriter 4y ago> ChatGPT is incredibly good at generating plausible text, but nearly all of the time it fails to hold up to detailed scrutiny. It writes like a human who doesn’t know what they are talking about, but have chosen to bullshit something instead of admit they don’t know. What do you expect of a model trained, largely, on the public internet? (Note, if it was trained on professionally published books, without quite a bit of selectivity, I would expect the same; this isn’t so much about the internet as about people.)