6 ms·

This post feels like the people that go into linux forums and say linux sucks because I can't get it to do X but microsoft can, but then get 400 replies and sev

This post feels like the people that go into linux forums and say linux sucks because I can't get it to do X but microsoft can, but then get 400 replies and several that show <how to do thing> GPT has limited reasoning but given enough knowledge of the problem you can coerce it to do surprising things so long as you can relate it to something in else in the knowledge base. Given how big that knowledge base is, you can get lucky surprises where things just work if you fish around enough

matwood 4y ago
> you can coerce it to do surprising things Yeah, I've gotten it to write some pretty decent contracts, but only because I have written said contracts and can ask it all the right questions/prod it into adding what I need.
- hnfong 4y ago
  And the next iteration of ChatGPT will likely generate a better contract because your interaction with it will be used as training data
  - jamiek88 4y ago
    Huh. There’s something scary about that in my lizard brain. Not sure what.
    - pixl97 4y ago
      Its like feeding a baby polar bear. When it grows up it is going to eat you.
      - ashwagary 4y ago
        Extending this analogy into a question: Could the polar bear community eat enough expert food providers that their quality of food and eventually overall health declines?
        pbhjpbhj 4y ago
        Will GPTs eat themselves, or more correctly, will they dilute their training corpuses until there are no gains to make? Seems possible. Like how we've relied on fossil fuels that are a limited resources, to get further we have to go beyond such fuels. It seems like we're in the process of locking in our highest attainable level of text-or-image based advancement. We mine the expertise in industries (programming, music production, graphic design, ...) and simultaneously cause the replacement of many future experts. Thus leading to a lack of expert output that we can mine? Now, currently, the problem seems to be "we're putting people out of work" -- but that's progress. The real problem is that we are unevenly distributing the benefits.
  - simonh 4y ago
    It will only be a better contract if it better meets the actual real world requirement, rather than the requirement it was literally given. That means inferring information that isn't there. Now that is possible for common situations but not reliably even for a human expert. The way a human lawyer would do that is by interrogating the client and asking about likely additional requirement and iterating on them to agree on a final requirement. Current LLM architectures aren't capable of this, and it's hard to see how they could be re-architected to do it because it's a very different kind of task, but if that ever is achieved then there may be no limit to what such a system can do.
whateveracct 4y ago
the big thing to me is programming isn't hard I've worked on adtech, crypto, fintech, gamedev, startup founder, BigCo. Not once was programming something that was a time sink. Makes me feel like GPT is marketing to the incompetent or something.
- copperx 4y ago
  > Not once was programming something that was a time sink. Can you please expound on that? Do you mean not hard as in comparison to something else?
  - noitpmeder 4y ago
    I think all it shows is that GP has never worked on complicated problems that require anything more than gluing libraries together.
    - Jensson 4y ago
      If you do nontrivial coding then GPT wont help you, so that isn't relevant for the discussion.
      - noitpmeder 4y ago
        I disagree. GP, by their statement and appeal "I've worked on adtech, crypto, fintech, gamedev, startup founder, ...", implies that he has worked on complicated software issues, and that he thinks GPT is a promising replacement for developers working on those problems.
        Jensson 4y ago
        > implies that he has worked on complicated software issues No it doesn't, there is a lot of simple "gluing APIs together" to do in all of those. The hard part then is figuring out what you want to do, not getting the code to do it.
        4y ago

matwood 4y ago

> you can coerce it to do surprising things Yeah, I've gotten it to write some pretty decent contracts, but only because I have written said contracts and can ask it all the right questions/prod it into adding what I need.

hnfong 4y ago
And the next iteration of ChatGPT will likely generate a better contract because your interaction with it will be used as training data
- jamiek88 4y ago
  Huh. There’s something scary about that in my lizard brain. Not sure what.
  - pixl97 4y ago
    Its like feeding a baby polar bear. When it grows up it is going to eat you.
    - ashwagary 4y ago
      Extending this analogy into a question: Could the polar bear community eat enough expert food providers that their quality of food and eventually overall health declines?
      - pbhjpbhj 4y ago
        Will GPTs eat themselves, or more correctly, will they dilute their training corpuses until there are no gains to make? Seems possible. Like how we've relied on fossil fuels that are a limited resources, to get further we have to go beyond such fuels. It seems like we're in the process of locking in our highest attainable level of text-or-image based advancement. We mine the expertise in industries (programming, music production, graphic design, ...) and simultaneously cause the replacement of many future experts. Thus leading to a lack of expert output that we can mine? Now, currently, the problem seems to be "we're putting people out of work" -- but that's progress. The real problem is that we are unevenly distributing the benefits.
- simonh 4y ago
  It will only be a better contract if it better meets the actual real world requirement, rather than the requirement it was literally given. That means inferring information that isn't there. Now that is possible for common situations but not reliably even for a human expert. The way a human lawyer would do that is by interrogating the client and asking about likely additional requirement and iterating on them to agree on a final requirement. Current LLM architectures aren't capable of this, and it's hard to see how they could be re-architected to do it because it's a very different kind of task, but if that ever is achieved then there may be no limit to what such a system can do.

whateveracct 4y ago

the big thing to me is programming isn't hard I've worked on adtech, crypto, fintech, gamedev, startup founder, BigCo. Not once was programming something that was a time sink. Makes me feel like GPT is marketing to the incompetent or something.

copperx 4y ago
> Not once was programming something that was a time sink. Can you please expound on that? Do you mean not hard as in comparison to something else?
- noitpmeder 4y ago
  I think all it shows is that GP has never worked on complicated problems that require anything more than gluing libraries together.
  - Jensson 4y ago
    If you do nontrivial coding then GPT wont help you, so that isn't relevant for the discussion.
    - noitpmeder 4y ago
      I disagree. GP, by their statement and appeal "I've worked on adtech, crypto, fintech, gamedev, startup founder, ...", implies that he has worked on complicated software issues, and that he thinks GPT is a promising replacement for developers working on those problems.
      - Jensson 4y ago
        > implies that he has worked on complicated software issues No it doesn't, there is a lot of simple "gluing APIs together" to do in all of those. The hard part then is figuring out what you want to do, not getting the code to do it.
      - 4y ago