3 ms·
The difference is that ChatGPT, having been trained with almost all the knowledge in the world, has a lot of simple things it still can't get right. If a human
by kif 4y ago
The difference is that ChatGPT, having been trained with almost all the knowledge in the world, has a lot of simple things it still can't get right.
If a human had memorised the same amount of knowledge, it would be a different story.
- akasakahakada 4y agoWhat is the different story? Assume the an AI knows everything. And another human knows owns equal amount of knowledge. What's next? Still human is superior by magic?
- kif 4y agoFor instance, you don't see historians hallucinating historical events that never occurred -- which ChatGPT does. Replace "historians" with any profession, and "historical events" with something that pertains to that profession.
- akasakahakada 4y agoHallucinating the whole history of an old language. Not offically a historian, but still human. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/aug/26/shock-an-aw-us-teenager-wrote-huge-slice-of-scots-wikipedia https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/aug/26/shock-an-aw-...
- akasakahakada 4y agoAssume professional trainings can increase the factuality of someone, then how it is trained? Through what material? Textbook is being used in the progress? Fact sheet is being used in the progress? If ultimately it is just words on papers, no way we can't build a Prolog factchecking system.