5 ms·

That's what I got from this too. Copywriting is about the only thing ChatGTP _is_ good for.

by throwyawayyyy 3y ago

cush 3y ago
And the dozens of other tasks outlined in the Sparks of AGI paper
- lm28469 3y ago
  > the Sparks of AGI paper Written by .... Microsoft Research .... owned by ... the company that just invested ~$15b into Openai and their largest partner to date Conflict of interest level: over 9000
  - cush 3y ago
    It's irrelevant whether there's a conflict of interest or not. The findings in the paper are easily verifiable
    - lm28469 3y ago
      Most of it isn't repeatable, try it for yourself...
      - cush 3y ago
        I have... It takes like 10 seconds to verify yourself.... If you're claiming there's been academic fraud in the paper, feel free to cite your sources...
        lm28469 3y ago
        I have too, the three I picked randomly didn't work. Because like for every other queries there is no repeatability, you can ask it the same thing every day and get different answers for the same exact prompt
lordnacho 3y ago
Basically any low risk content. "Make me a dropshipping site with text and images" was one of the ones that came to mind. High risk would be reading legal documents and recommending what the lawyer should do.
- adventured 3y ago
  One of the best uses for GPT right now, before the door is slammed shut, is using it for bootstrapping services that require a lot of text content (using GPT to solve some of the chicken or the egg / two-sided momentum problem early on). If you wanted to jumpstart a competitor to Goodreads for example, GPT can do elaborate book summaries and character discussion (etc). Use that to get a foundation of content (so the first users don't arrive to a nearly empty shell of a site). This won't be possible for much longer, and bots like GPT will become drastically more difficult to build (regulation, content restrictions, et al.), and also likely more expensive to utilize for valuable purposes (they'll maximize its commercial value, once they understand fully how to bracket all of that and extract properly). GPT got out of the barn before the door was closed (before most realized the door was even open), a few more might make it out before the vast web of restrictions set in (whether content services like Reddit & Stack trying to block use for building services like GPT, or big media empires doing the same, or image/video owners trying to preserve the value of their works, or governments regulating, and so on). GPT is in the early wild like Uber was, before governments around the world locked down on that premise, which created a captured market in many locations (whether by Uber or a local competitor that beat Uber there). That open situation never lasts. And when other (financially interested) entities see something like GPT's commercial exploitation potential, the barriers go up, they all want a part of what's possible. There won't be many GPTs in fact, for the exact same reason there aren't many Ubers. There will be a few prominent generalized gigantic bots/services that were early (were able to be built up before the lockdown of content access & consequences changed); and then there will be a lot of highly focused, niche bots that splinter the market over time and do more narrow things extraordinarily well. It'll also sort of follow the search market in this regard.
  - djmips 3y ago
    Can't you just turn to an open source alternative?
mumblemumble 3y ago
I tend to roll my eyes at a lot of the hype a fair bit, too, but the tricks that are getting media play aren't the only tricks this pony can do. They're just the one that are generating most the hype because that's what captures peoples imaginations. And understandably. The basic formula of futurism has always been and will always be, "Take X everyday thing and come up with a version of it that's fundamentally the same as how it works now, only with robots." But it's also pretty darned good at doing things that might not be as popularly relatable. There are some teams reporting that GPT4 can outperform Mechanical Turk labelers for many corpus labeling tasks, for example. That might then significantly reduce the cost of developing NLP products that may or may not use a GPT-series network as part of the production implementation. ChatGPT and GPT4 can also do a pretty darned good job at producing synthetic data. Other methods may be able to produce higher-quality data, but at typically at the cost of a much larger development effort. That could, for example, be useful for privacy-preserving machine learning where you want to develop a model that's tailored to a specific task, but you don't want to (or, if you're lucky enough to live and work in a sensible regulatory regime, maybe even can't) use actual sensitive data to train the model. The underlying embedding model may or may not outperform BERT for specific tasks. I haven't poked at that issue much, but it wouldn't surprise me.
geophile 3y ago
... because there are minimal quality criteria.
notahacker 3y ago
Ironically I don't think it's a particularly good copywriter unless you're specifically aiming for cheesy ad style or utterly generic, it's just that standards are low, and lots of copy isn't really written for humans anyway. We just care about and have fewer pre-written examples of other stuff more... (its real strength as a writer over humans other than being low effort is niche stuff like composing entire sentences with alliteration)

That's what I got from this too. Copywriting is about the only thing ChatGTP _is_ good for.

cush 3y ago

And the dozens of other tasks outlined in the Sparks of AGI paper

lm28469 3y ago
> the Sparks of AGI paper Written by .... Microsoft Research .... owned by ... the company that just invested ~$15b into Openai and their largest partner to date Conflict of interest level: over 9000
- cush 3y ago
  It's irrelevant whether there's a conflict of interest or not. The findings in the paper are easily verifiable
  - lm28469 3y ago
    Most of it isn't repeatable, try it for yourself...
    - cush 3y ago
      I have... It takes like 10 seconds to verify yourself.... If you're claiming there's been academic fraud in the paper, feel free to cite your sources...
      - lm28469 3y ago
        I have too, the three I picked randomly didn't work. Because like for every other queries there is no repeatability, you can ask it the same thing every day and get different answers for the same exact prompt

lordnacho 3y ago

Basically any low risk content. "Make me a dropshipping site with text and images" was one of the ones that came to mind. High risk would be reading legal documents and recommending what the lawyer should do.

adventured 3y ago
One of the best uses for GPT right now, before the door is slammed shut, is using it for bootstrapping services that require a lot of text content (using GPT to solve some of the chicken or the egg / two-sided momentum problem early on). If you wanted to jumpstart a competitor to Goodreads for example, GPT can do elaborate book summaries and character discussion (etc). Use that to get a foundation of content (so the first users don't arrive to a nearly empty shell of a site). This won't be possible for much longer, and bots like GPT will become drastically more difficult to build (regulation, content restrictions, et al.), and also likely more expensive to utilize for valuable purposes (they'll maximize its commercial value, once they understand fully how to bracket all of that and extract properly). GPT got out of the barn before the door was closed (before most realized the door was even open), a few more might make it out before the vast web of restrictions set in (whether content services like Reddit & Stack trying to block use for building services like GPT, or big media empires doing the same, or image/video owners trying to preserve the value of their works, or governments regulating, and so on). GPT is in the early wild like Uber was, before governments around the world locked down on that premise, which created a captured market in many locations (whether by Uber or a local competitor that beat Uber there). That open situation never lasts. And when other (financially interested) entities see something like GPT's commercial exploitation potential, the barriers go up, they all want a part of what's possible. There won't be many GPTs in fact, for the exact same reason there aren't many Ubers. There will be a few prominent generalized gigantic bots/services that were early (were able to be built up before the lockdown of content access & consequences changed); and then there will be a lot of highly focused, niche bots that splinter the market over time and do more narrow things extraordinarily well. It'll also sort of follow the search market in this regard.
- djmips 3y ago
  Can't you just turn to an open source alternative?

mumblemumble 3y ago

I tend to roll my eyes at a lot of the hype a fair bit, too, but the tricks that are getting media play aren't the only tricks this pony can do. They're just the one that are generating most the hype because that's what captures peoples imaginations. And understandably. The basic formula of futurism has always been and will always be, "Take X everyday thing and come up with a version of it that's fundamentally the same as how it works now, only with robots." But it's also pretty darned good at doing things that might not be as popularly relatable. There are some teams reporting that GPT4 can outperform Mechanical Turk labelers for many corpus labeling tasks, for example. That might then significantly reduce the cost of developing NLP products that may or may not use a GPT-series network as part of the production implementation. ChatGPT and GPT4 can also do a pretty darned good job at producing synthetic data. Other methods may be able to produce higher-quality data, but at typically at the cost of a much larger development effort. That could, for example, be useful for privacy-preserving machine learning where you want to develop a model that's tailored to a specific task, but you don't want to (or, if you're lucky enough to live and work in a sensible regulatory regime, maybe even can't) use actual sensitive data to train the model. The underlying embedding model may or may not outperform BERT for specific tasks. I haven't poked at that issue much, but it wouldn't surprise me.

geophile 3y ago

... because there are minimal quality criteria.

notahacker 3y ago

Ironically I don't think it's a particularly good copywriter unless you're specifically aiming for cheesy ad style or utterly generic, it's just that standards are low, and lots of copy isn't really written for humans anyway. We just care about and have fewer pre-written examples of other stuff more... (its real strength as a writer over humans other than being low effort is niche stuff like composing entire sentences with alliteration)