3 ms·
I do tire of these appeal to hypocrisy/inconsistency type arguments that rely on collapsing important distinctions. It’s generally accepted that artwork can de
by kristianc 4y ago
I do tire of these appeal to hypocrisy/inconsistency type arguments that rely on collapsing important distinctions.
It’s generally accepted that artwork can delve into the fantastical and absurd. That’s part of the point of it being art.
ChatGPT isn’t for the most part trying to be performance artwork - it is striving to be ‘right’ and to give the correct answer to your question.
- fenomas 4y agoI don't think that premise stands. If I ask ChatGPT to write a poem about Sherlock Holmes fighting a mermaid it will happily do so, and I think most users would agree that it'd be a failure mode if it refused. Isn't it more the case that people are expecting it to sometimes be an artist and other times be a true-fact database, and assuming the AI will know which one they want?
- kristianc 4y agoNo, because inherent in them asking ChatGPT to write them a poem about Sherlock Holmes is that they’re asking ChatGPT to write something fictional and artistic.
- fenomas 4y agoThat's what I just said - people are expecting the AI to discern from the prompt whether to answer in fiction mode or fact mode. And my point here is, people who understand the tech should know that only one of those modes actually exists! It's a generative AI; it doesn't have a fact-retrieval-mode any more than StableDiffusion does.