3 ms·

> "None of this shit informs. None of it makes clear." Ask it to inform and make clear, ChatGPT can do explanations. Prompt: "I have heard people say "c'est n

> "None of this shit informs. None of it makes clear." Ask it to inform and make clear, ChatGPT can do explanations. Prompt: "I have heard people say "c'est ne pas un pipe" has deep meaning, can you explain simply to me?" Answer: "The phrase "c'est ne pas un pipe" is a French sentence that means "this is not a pipe." It is a famous statement by the Belgian surrealist artist René Magritte, who painted a picture of a pipe with the words "Ceci n'est pas une pipe" ("This is not a pipe") written underneath. The meaning behind the phrase is often interpreted as a commentary on the nature of representation and reality. Magritte's painting is not actually a pipe, but a representation of a pipe. The painting can never be smoked, and therefore it is not a pipe in the literal sense. The phrase "C'est ne pas un pipe" challenges the viewer's assumptions about the relationship between words, images, and reality, and invites them to question the nature of representation. In other words, the phrase suggests that there is a difference between an object or idea and its representation, and that the representation is not the same thing as the real thing. This idea can be applied to many aspects of life, such as language, art, and even our perceptions of ourselves and the world around us." It connected my broken French with the correct sentence, translated it, put it in context of who said it and when, and expanded into a coherent and correct explanation of some deeper meaning. That's a better explanation than a monkey-on-type-writer or Markov chain simple token-predictor has any right to give, isn't it? > "it's not intellectual augmentation, it doesn't extend how we think, it thinks for us" Ever had the experience where you recognise a famous person's face on TV but can't think who they are, wait for a while, and then the answer 'comes to you'? That is "thinking for myself" but it's not me actively doing anything, it's magic information retrieval that happens to me. I'm not sure what the act of thinking consists of ("when I went to bed, I lay awake, doing something I call thinking but probably is not." - JOB, Robert Heinlein); what do you have in mind for a machine 'extending how we think'?

rektide 4y ago
> Prompt: "I have heard people say "c'est ne pas un pipe" has deep meaning, can you explain simply to me?" This is a topic that the academic & internet worlds have both tread a million times over. That the AIs can find some relevant selections in it's memory banks & regurgitate some synopsis does not impress me. And worse, none of this alien intelligence's conclusions are in any way original or distinct: they're all blank boring averages. A ranked selection of the variety of existing models that it's embedded within itself. I could not be less impressed. I could not be sadder to see such vacuous crap hyped. > That is "thinking for myself" but it's not me actively doing anything, it's magic information retrieval that happens to me. The case you describe is just recall. What is exceptional about humans & intellect isn't recall, but connection, & association. I too am not sure what the act of thinking consists of, but in almost all cases I respect there's at least some reminisce of the influences, some distillation of points of view where ideas came from. And machine learning is bereft of this point of view, is it's own weird expert universe, that does nothing to express itself usefully. It's all barren. It's stochastics. Without referent. Shame on us. Do you want a shitty lo-fi hyper-reality? This is how you get a shitty lo-fi hyper-reality. Where regurgitation of prominent symbols overtakes the real. By having idiot machines who have no conception of real fictate to us their idiot perspectives.
- dieselgate 4y ago
  Yo rektide thanks for your honest words, this evening on HN I’ve read many critical comments about chat bots and am glad to see them.They’re inline with my own opinions but separately it’s refreshing to see people elaborate on these points from different angles. There was also a post titled “what’s your hottake on chatgpt” or something and everything (at time of writing) is relatively critical of the technology and the future impact. It’s just such a strange time right now. I’m certainly impressed with the technology-side of things but it just leaves me feeling flat. Meanwhile at work today a manager broke the beginning silence of a meeting with “so who’s gonna try out the new Google Bard?”; blink, table flip. But also HN audience is probably way oversaturated on this stuff by now. “This is not intelligence”
- jodrellblank 4y ago
  Holding a coherent, contextual, on-topic conversation are things no computer has done before and nothing other than humans has ever done in the history of the universe. > "The case you describe is just recall" Natural language recall, over a memory bank larger than any human could ever memorise. > "they're all blank boring averages" Average of a near-infinity of topic you didn't know about is a significant improvement over how things were. > "What is exceptional about humans & intellect isn't recall, but connection, & association." "I refuse to be impressed until it's as exceptional as humans" is not an interesting take, it's a cynicaler-than-thou emo teenager take. > "Do you want a shitty lo-fi hyper-reality? This is how you get a shitty lo-fi hyper-reality. Where regurgitation of prominent symbols overtakes the real. By having idiot machines who have no conception of real fictate to us their idiot perspectives" The Sunday Times bestseller "The Martian" by Andy Weir is fictating to us an imaginary idea of surviving on Mars, in a way that would never work in reality. That didn't stop it being popular, enjoyable, influential, or make it a 'shitty low-fi reality where prominent symbols like the word Mars overtake the reality of the planet'.

rektide 4y ago

> Prompt: "I have heard people say "c'est ne pas un pipe" has deep meaning, can you explain simply to me?" This is a topic that the academic & internet worlds have both tread a million times over. That the AIs can find some relevant selections in it's memory banks & regurgitate some synopsis does not impress me. And worse, none of this alien intelligence's conclusions are in any way original or distinct: they're all blank boring averages. A ranked selection of the variety of existing models that it's embedded within itself. I could not be less impressed. I could not be sadder to see such vacuous crap hyped. > That is "thinking for myself" but it's not me actively doing anything, it's magic information retrieval that happens to me. The case you describe is just recall. What is exceptional about humans & intellect isn't recall, but connection, & association. I too am not sure what the act of thinking consists of, but in almost all cases I respect there's at least some reminisce of the influences, some distillation of points of view where ideas came from. And machine learning is bereft of this point of view, is it's own weird expert universe, that does nothing to express itself usefully. It's all barren. It's stochastics. Without referent. Shame on us. Do you want a shitty lo-fi hyper-reality? This is how you get a shitty lo-fi hyper-reality. Where regurgitation of prominent symbols overtakes the real. By having idiot machines who have no conception of real fictate to us their idiot perspectives.

dieselgate 4y ago
Yo rektide thanks for your honest words, this evening on HN I’ve read many critical comments about chat bots and am glad to see them.They’re inline with my own opinions but separately it’s refreshing to see people elaborate on these points from different angles. There was also a post titled “what’s your hottake on chatgpt” or something and everything (at time of writing) is relatively critical of the technology and the future impact. It’s just such a strange time right now. I’m certainly impressed with the technology-side of things but it just leaves me feeling flat. Meanwhile at work today a manager broke the beginning silence of a meeting with “so who’s gonna try out the new Google Bard?”; blink, table flip. But also HN audience is probably way oversaturated on this stuff by now. “This is not intelligence”
jodrellblank 4y ago
Holding a coherent, contextual, on-topic conversation are things no computer has done before and nothing other than humans has ever done in the history of the universe. > "The case you describe is just recall" Natural language recall, over a memory bank larger than any human could ever memorise. > "they're all blank boring averages" Average of a near-infinity of topic you didn't know about is a significant improvement over how things were. > "What is exceptional about humans & intellect isn't recall, but connection, & association." "I refuse to be impressed until it's as exceptional as humans" is not an interesting take, it's a cynicaler-than-thou emo teenager take. > "Do you want a shitty lo-fi hyper-reality? This is how you get a shitty lo-fi hyper-reality. Where regurgitation of prominent symbols overtakes the real. By having idiot machines who have no conception of real fictate to us their idiot perspectives" The Sunday Times bestseller "The Martian" by Andy Weir is fictating to us an imaginary idea of surviving on Mars, in a way that would never work in reality. That didn't stop it being popular, enjoyable, influential, or make it a 'shitty low-fi reality where prominent symbols like the word Mars overtake the reality of the planet'.