4 ms·
> Anytime you see the 'parrot' argument, you can instantly go 'opinion dismissed'. I also seriously question whether anyone making the 'parrot argument' has ac
by zamalek 4y ago
> Anytime you see the 'parrot' argument, you can instantly go 'opinion dismissed'.
I also seriously question whether anyone making the 'parrot argument' has actually used ChatGPT for anything meaningful. If it is nothing more than a parrot, then parrots are significantly more creative than I realized.
- JohnFen 4y agoI don't know why you question this. I've used it for meaningful stuff, but I am not convinced that ChatGPT is more than a very sophisticated variety of Eliza. Just because one person is convinced by an experience doesn't mean people who aren't convinced by it haven't had the experience.
- fauxpause_ 4y agoI agree. Coincidentally I don’t think you are more than a very sophisticated variety of Eliza.
- JohnFen 4y agoThat wouldn't surprise me at all!
- andrepd 4y agoI have. Here is a list of things at which it failed: - Write a dead simple piece of code, which is however NOT found as an immediate answer to a stackoverflow question (I've tried this one upwards of 10 times, with no success) - Categorise a chord when I tell it the constituent pitches, and vice-versa - Solve a simple quadratic equation - Show a biography of this mildly obscure singer/politician/scholar - Write poetry in a given style - Give me references to read up on a certain technical topic ALL of these it fails, or rather, worse than fails: it spews plausible bullshit with the same confidence and tone it would spew correct answers. It can go up to manufacturing references and attributing to real people's names.