3 ms·

> Ok so you haven't used it then. Not only have I used it, I have made several accurate advance predictions about its behaviour and capabilities – some before

> Ok so you haven't used it then. Not only have I used it, I have made several accurate advance predictions about its behaviour and capabilities – some before GPT-4 was even published. I can model these models well enough to fool GPT output detectors into thinking that I am a GPT model. (Give me a writing task that GPT-4 can't be prompted to perform, and I can prove that last fact to you.) My theories aren't whack. Perhaps I'm not communicating my understanding very well? I'm not saying GPT-4 can't do anything I haven't listed, but that its ability is bounded by what's demonstrated in its corpus (2): the skill is not legitimately due to the model, and you should not expect a GPT-5 to be any better at the tasks. (In fact, it might well be worse: GPT-4 is worse than GPT-3 at some of these things.)

famouswaffles 4y ago
>Not only have I used it, I have made several accurate advance predictions about its behaviour and capabilities – some before GPT-4 was even published. No you actually haven't. That's what i'm trying to tell you. Your advance prediction are not accurate. what you imagine to be problems are not problems. your limits are not limits. you say it can't make good abstract translations unless overfit to the translation. that's just false. I know because i've tested translation extensively for numerous novels and other works >I can model these models well enough to fool GPT output detectors into thinking that I am a GPT model. (Give me a writing task that GPT-4 can't be prompted to perform, and I can prove that last fact to you.) Lmao. Okay mate. The notoriously unreliable GPT detectors with more false positives than can be counted. It's really funny you think this is an achievement. >(In fact, it might well be worse: GPT-4 is worse than GPT-3 at some of these things.) What is 4 worse than 3 at ? Give me something that is benchmarkable and can be tested.

famouswaffles 4y ago

>Not only have I used it, I have made several accurate advance predictions about its behaviour and capabilities – some before GPT-4 was even published. No you actually haven't. That's what i'm trying to tell you. Your advance prediction are not accurate. what you imagine to be problems are not problems. your limits are not limits. you say it can't make good abstract translations unless overfit to the translation. that's just false. I know because i've tested translation extensively for numerous novels and other works >I can model these models well enough to fool GPT output detectors into thinking that I am a GPT model. (Give me a writing task that GPT-4 can't be prompted to perform, and I can prove that last fact to you.) Lmao. Okay mate. The notoriously unreliable GPT detectors with more false positives than can be counted. It's really funny you think this is an achievement. >(In fact, it might well be worse: GPT-4 is worse than GPT-3 at some of these things.) What is 4 worse than 3 at ? Give me something that is benchmarkable and can be tested.