28 ms·
GPT makes learning fun again
- andai 3y agoMost people seem to prefer learning by talking and asking questions. At least, that's what I've gathered from Discord servers where 99.9% of people ask questions answered on the first page of the Readme ;)
- newprint 3y agoI'm confused. So, this person just asked ChatGPT bunch of surface level questions about Solid State Physics, got response. What is so exciting ?
- blast 3y agoThe author describes his learning process in detail and explains what's exciting: he got a basic understanding of the subject within minutes, after being frustrated by Wikipedia, a physics education site, and some other site. Getting through the surface level is a big deal for someone who's new to a subject.
- simonw 3y agoThe article explains exactly why they find this exciting, by comparing it to the same research exercise conducted using Google and Wikipedia.
- grrdotcloud 3y agoImagine being able to ask questions and get answers back based upon understanding, and not upon a curriculum or agenda. I have found this method to allow me to consume information much faster while skipping over the often tedious topics.
- kerkeslager 3y agoDo you think that "tediousness" is a good indicator of whether a topic is important?
- grrdotcloud 3y agoNo,I don't think so. There are times when you ask a question, and the person will condescend, in the positive sense, and speak at a level below you. I prefer to ask when I am teaching where I should start. I'll explain very quickly the basics, if they're familiar, I'll jump the next level. Until I reach the depth of their understanding, I will skip over foundational concepts.
- namaria 3y agoShhhh, the more Duning-Kruger, the more valuable true competence becomes.
- DotaFan 3y agoIt is very helpful to learn new stuff indeed, I am personally using https://www.phind.com https://www.phind.com.
- an_aparallel 3y agoim using phind too - phinding it pretty incredible. As someone learning development - it has helped me with so many of the annoyances of learning dev environments, like: setting up a venv.. environmental variable issues in windows. *diagnosing a UTF-8 issue in windows. i get that professionals problems would be harder to answer...however, getting responses without wading through stack exchange entry after entry has really kept me focused, and prevented the often times frustrating recursive spiral which is getting an issue with your issues issue...
- pulvinar 3y agoI like how it checks its facts (mostly, anyway). It didn't give a wrong answer when asked "Is there a digital to analog converter with an 8V analog range and serial input?", which another poster (mhb) had shown to trip up plain GPT4.
- homieg33 3y agoIt’s nice to be able to ask ChatGPT a half baked, poorly researched, poorly worded question with bad grammar yet get a totally good faith response back that’s a springboard for follow up questions. Whereas if you did the same thing on any stack exchange site you get downvotes and comments like “please read the guidelines and edit your question.”
- pavlov 3y agoKindness and patience have always been in short supply on the public internet, but AI can simulate them in infinite amounts. That’s a positive thing about this generative AI revolution that I haven’t really thought about in those terms until now.
- p-e-w 3y agoThat is actually the killer feature of interactive AIs. People go on and on and on about "accuracy", completely ignoring that accuracy is irrelevant to 99.9% of things that humans do in their everyday lives. Simulating (positive) human interaction is far more impactful than getting facts correct.
- kerkeslager 3y agoWhat does it mean to have a positive interaction with someone who consistently tells you misinformation with a high degree of confidence?
- 3y ago
- devjab 3y agoI'm in two minds about it. On one hand the internet (in general) has become so hard to find information on, and I agree with the author that GPT is a breath of fresh air. On the other hand I've seen GPT fail so miserably at topics that I'm knowledge about that I have a very hard time trusting anything it tells me. I'm not sure what the answer really is, but I'm not sure it's GPT. I wish we could go back to having search engines that actually led to useful information and not just advertisements, and I wish we had a GPT that would not tell lies. I doubt either of those wishes are going to come true though. Search engines are likely always going to be SEO'ed into uselessness and GPT isn't intentionally telling lies.
- thsbrown 3y agoJust out of curiosity are you using got 4 or 3.5?
- userbinator 3y agoIt's become hard, and will become harder, precisely because of things like GPT (unintentionally) spreading misinformation. I'm against censorship in general, and this is no exception, but I do hope it leads to people becoming more critical of what they consume. However, I suspect that instead we will unfortunately see the continued cycle of creating large masses of people "educated" on such widely-propagated half-truths, while only a tiny subset of the population will have the actual truth.
- brokencode 3y agoThe internet is a misinformation spreading machine. GPT is new and will surely improve over time, but I can’t say the same for the internet. In an ideal world, people would learn only from high quality sources like books and schools. But a shocking amount of people learn mostly through social media and whatever they find on Google. I think LLMs will provide a better alternative.
- vanviegen 3y agoExactly! LLMs will be able/are able to construct their answers not just based on one Reddit comment they found somewhere, but on "all* comments as well as more reliable sources, such as the actual source code for the thing under discussion, scientific debate, (case) law texts, books, etc. They already seem somewhat capable of weighing source reliability.
- akeck 3y agoFun with caveats I'm finding. Today I asked for an outline of DevSecOps concept based on CISA recommendations. The CISA doc it referenced doesn't actually exist.
- danielbln 3y agoFor something like that you really want to use GPT3/4 hooked up to search, e.g. https://www.phind.com/search?q=give+me+an+outline+of+DevSecOps+concept+based+on+CISA+recommendations.&c=&source=searchbox https://www.phind.com/search?q=give+me+an+outline+of+DevSecO...
- chazeon 3y agoI really found asking GPT to put a math concept under a physics context very helpful for me. As a computational physics student, that is really how I understand math and the world. Only very few textbooks can help me with this. From [Make Something Wonderful: Steve Jobs in His Own Words][1], Steve once said in a interview in 1983: > The problem was, you can't ask Aristotle a question. And I think, as we look towards the next fifty to one hundred years, if we really can come up with these machines that can capture an underlying spirit, or an underlying set of principles, or an underlying way of looking at the world, then, when the next Aristotle comes around, maybe if he carries around one of these machines with him his whole life–his or her whole life–and types in all this stuff, then maybe someday, after this person's dead and gone, we can ask this machine, “Hey, what would Aristotle have said? What about this?” And maybe we won't get the right answer, but maybe we will. And that's really exciting to me. And that's one of the reasons I'm doing what I'm doing. And this future, expected "next fifty to one hundred years", is somewhat here already. [1]: https://book.stevejobsarchive.com/ https://book.stevejobsarchive.com/
- waterhouse 3y agoYou might like the quote from Vladimir Arnold: "Mathematics is a part of physics. Physics is an experimental science, a part of natural science. Mathematics is the part of physics where experiments are cheap."
- selimthegrim 3y agoWhich textbooks?
- chazeon 3y agoHere are some examples: e.g, Martingales for Physicists, Deep Learning and Physics
- seb1204 3y agoHow do you know what ChatGPT tells you is correct?
- 3y ago
- kccqzy 3y agoYou can downvote me but I think OP hasn't learned how to learn yet. If OP reads Wikipedia by understanding every sentence and clicking on every link, that's deliberately sabotaging his own learning. Attitudes like "I don't really feel like spelunking through a ton more articles" simply shows OP isn't interested in learning per se, just quick answers. OP learns in a way that's very child-like. When you are a five-year-old it's okay to learn by asking everything. That stops being acceptable by the age of fifteen. OP hasn't learned any research skills yet, and when OP's needs inevitably exhausts the ability of LLMs, OP would be utterly unable to read an encyclopedia or a research paper or perhaps a textbook.
- thsbrown 3y agoJust out of curiosity what would say is the optimal way to learn from an encyclopedia, research paper or Wikipedia?
- dmbche 3y agoSticking to what you want to understand - for example, when reading a paper, you don't necessarily need to read the methodology, especially if it's out of your field. Read the abstract and the conclusion, identify any part of it that you are suprised by and would like further explanation, and go see that part of the paper. A lot of the paper is talking to peer and people wanting to verify the validity of the paper - by it being peer reviewed, you can mostly assume that the paper is valid, and stick to what the paper is saying instead of it's methodology.
- noduerme 3y ago>> you can mostly assume that the paper is valid What? Is that something you can still assume in 2023?
- abdou4a 3y ago>> you can mostly assume that the paper is valid you should check this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_dredging https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_dredging or P-hacking and many more...
- brokencode 3y agoI noticed a while back that the internet has made me terribly prone to skimming. It got to a point where I could hardly stand to read anything longer than a short news article. To learn anything useful on the internet, you pretty much have to skim. So much of the internet is so loaded with filler and BS that it is hardly worth reading at all. With ChatGPT, it’s incredibly refreshing to be able to ask a question and get nothing other than a concise answer. No skimming required. I feel so much more focused and better able to learn this way.
- the_duke 3y agoI have a standard copy n paste prompt that instructs it to keep answers concise and free of boilerplate. Otherwise ChatGPT is prone to injecting lots of filler text as well.
- piaste 3y agoCare to share that prompt? I find the fillers and disclaimers very grating too.
- the_duke 3y ago> You are an experienced expert in XXX. You always answer questions to the best of your knowledge, but you NEVER provide answers that you are not sure about, or that are not backed up by high-quality sources; instead you say that you can't provide a good answer. Giving trustworthy and correct answers is much more important to you than always having something to say. You keep your answers concise, on-topic, free of boilerplate, and exclude basic instructions that most developers will be familiar with anyway, unless the user asks for more details.
- bob_boblaw 3y agohmm that makes sense. I too have skimmed way too much because of the BS. and ya it is refreshing now that I think about it
- phh 3y agoIt's interesting because that's my biggest gripe against ChatGPT, it's too verbose and very hard to skim through. Compared to stack overflow answers it'll be easily four times longer. Sure compared to for instance news website, it is less verbose, but those are easy to skim. I'm still able to read through well written text without skimming, though yes most of the texts I'll read I'll skim through, then go back and then to improve my global understanding, which I think is beneficial
- chx 3y agoThis is incredibly, incredibly naive. "Within minutes, I learned" -- absolutely nothing. At most you've learned how the answers to your question would sound like. They are not the answers.
- simonw 3y agoHow sure are you about that?
- chx 3y agoEven if the answers accidentally happen to be correct, that's just the broken clock happens to be correct twice a day. The information value of answers by ChatGPT is zero.
- dmbche 3y agoI mean did you read the discussion he had with the language model? Does it clarify anything better than you would get by skimming wikipedia? I have not found these explanations sufficient, while I have done a bit of chemistry and physics I understand the basics of light emissions, but reading this has the same value as reading the wiki article on LEDs to me.
- simonw 3y agoIt was a lot shorter than the Wikipedia articles.
- dmbche 3y agoSure - when I skim articles, I often don't read all of it and stick to what I'm interested in - I'd argue that even takes less time than chatting with chat-gpt and fact checking it (Edit: - and you get sources right away with wikipedia!)
- p-e-w 3y ago> They are not the answers. You can't possibly know that.
- kumarvvr 3y agoThis is so ridiculous. GPT is like that "know-it-all" friend we have who just has something to say about anything, with knowledge skimmed from the internet. GPT is a language model. It outputs what you want to hear, not what is correct.
- p-e-w 3y ago> It outputs what you want to hear Nonsense. How could it possibly know "what you want to hear"?
- kumarvvr 3y agoBecause we tell it what we want. "How do I do this" "How do I do that" "What is this" "What is that"
- wrycoder 3y agoAnd it tries to give an answer that would be interpreted as a positive, rather than negative, reply.
- jhugo 3y agoIt outputs what some idealised version of a person wants to hear, where what is "idealised" has been determined by its training. I've noticed, for example, that it appears to have been trained to want to give responses that seem helpful, and make you trust it. When it's outputting garbage code that doesn't work, it will often say things like "I have tested this and it works correctly", despite that being an impossibility.
- momojo 3y agoI think "What you want to hear" is in the same spirit as an undergraduate attempting to regurgitate half-baked knowledge into an answer that will get him the grade. Maybe a better rephrasing would be "ChatGPT has been trained to give answers to questions in a clear, confident manner, regardless of the content" From the announcement post: https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt > We trained this model using Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF), using the same methods as InstructGPT, but with slight differences in the data collection setup. We trained an initial model using supervised fine-tuning: human AI trainers provided conversations in which they played both sides—the user and an AI assistant. So I agree with OP; it's been trained to give answers that sound plausible but not necessarily correct. It's even mentioned in the "Limitations" section at the bottom of the blog post. > ChatGPT sometimes writes plausible-sounding but incorrect or nonsensical answers. Fixing this issue is challenging, as: (1) during RL training, there’s currently no source of truth; (2) training the model to be more cautious causes it to decline questions that it can answer correctly; and (3) supervised training misleads the model because the ideal answer depends on what the model knows, rather than what the human demonstrator knows.
- renewiltord 3y agoShortly before GPT and friends burst on the scene, I was looking for a website which would meet me where I am as an engineer - I've written reams of code in various languages. If I want to try Rust, I don't want to be taught uint8 v uint16 or that you shadow variables. I want to know the interesting parts. ChatGPT is pretty good at this and the other thing I want: pandas training. You can ask it to generate exercises at any difficulty and also provide test data! This tool is the biggest mind expander for me since search engines.
- shortsightedsid 3y agoIts almost as if ChatGPT is getting to be a form of dialogic learning [1]. While ChatGPT is not yet an authoritative source, it should be possible to get to such a future. The problem is with the ethics of it becoming an authoritative source and how it can possibly unlearn (or accept change or challenges). For now, the example OP provides is without authority where they learnt about a topic taking ChatGPT as a peer. References: 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialogic_learning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialogic_learning
- enoch2090 3y agoNow whenever I need to use a fancy new package that I never used of, I use LangChain to collect all documents from the package document site, load them into a vectorDB and start asking GPT questions. This method works in 80% of the time. One pitfall is that with this method I only get what I want. I don't get a deep understanding of that package as it used to be if I carefully read over the documents. Still finding a balancing point in between.
- kweingar 3y agoChatGPT can be a great supplement for independent research. But when the article mentions a “curious seventh-grader”, I think we should focus on getting them quality human instruction whenever possible instead of just pointing them to ChatGPT. ChatGPT addresses a scalability problem: not everyone has access to a tutor or can just call up a teacher or mentor to learn and ask questions. But some in the tech industry claim that ChatGPT is as good as or even better than human instruction, which to me seems totally off base. The biggest problem I see in using LLMs as a teacher-substitute is that LLMs answer the questions you ask, whereas a good teacher tells you what you need to hear. Maybe this is solvable with specialized model tuning, but we need to actually solve it before telling kids that the best way to learn is to talk to the computer.
- rapsacnz 3y agoDon't forget that GPT was trained on data from all the sources that failed you. So if we all collectively neglect them, and they fall over, we will lose many valuable resources. I think we need to think about how to keep these valuable sites going, because they are ultimately providing most of the value of the various available language models.
- jhugo 3y agoWhen was learning ever not fun?
- butler14 3y agoThis is the classic "google is so crap now", then when you dig a bit, the search query is something incredibly broad (in this case "led") or irrelevant, with the author then complaining about the quality of the results I'm not taking anything away from Chat-GPT for this use case, but I see the above pattern in almost every Google bashing thread on HN.
- lars512 3y agoI totally agree with the author, I find I'm finally able to ask about a range of new concepts, get them explained at my level, and dive deeper as curiosity warrants it. It's also magical when you summarise the understanding you've reached back to it, and it can confirm or tweak it for you. In other ways it's also nice to just pay for it and then to be in an advertising free space. One critique is that when you ask it to compare things it's often too balanced or too positive/enthusiastic ("both are great for different reasons!") when what you want is a more sober analysis. But you can usually do some prompt management to adjust it back to a reasonable range.
- noduerme 3y agoWhy learn? The best part about LLMs is you and your children will never need to know anything or think anything ever again.
- bowsamic 3y agoThat sounds like the worst part, not the best part
- noduerme 3y agoYeah, sarcasm.
- Aachen 3y agoWas not clear to me either
- noduerme 3y agoSorry. I'm glad I clarified. Almost everything I write should come with a red label above it that says: Gallows Humor. I get taken seriously way more often than I expect to, or should be, around here. Although it's a little weird that we're on a board where someone could seriously mean what I said and people wouldn't think it was a joke. e.g. the "You let your kids use calculators, don't you?" crowd.
- Aachen 3y agoJust now I heard someone unironically say that it's about time the USA government stops the supply of porn to minors via the Internet (presumably that's any nudity to anyone under 21 or maybe 18, another thing I never know when reading USA-originating comments). You just can't tell what kind of wacky opinions are out there and what's a joke. The comment read as though posted by someone who enjoys watching others waste time disagreeing with them, until they said something about social media in the end that's much less far out there and makes me conclude the comment is likely actually genuine. It's also kinda rude to assume someone is joking when they were actually serious, so yeah one tends to get taken seriously when in doubt...
- selimthegrim 3y agoHe has got a surface level understanding - GPT doesn't disambiguate crystal momentum from momentum for example.
- wrycoder 3y agoHe didn’t bother to ask a clarifying question. Apparently, he found as much as he wanted to know at the time.
- johlits 3y agoHot take: AI knowledge is what Bitcoin is to money. It is not backed by anything and therefore cannot be trusted. Regular knowledge is backed by a degree which has actual value in the end.
- tarasglek 3y agoThings I learned using gpt in last 6 mo: * Various new english idioms. I read a lot, but still find new ones * More optimal translations between languages i'm ~native in. * ton of new JS, Python libs * Got deeper in SQL (recursive queries, etc) * Can use CSS way better than before * Mermaid I wrote https://chatcraft.org/ https://chatcraft.org/ as a friendlier UI for learning programming related things.
- alex-moon 3y agoSo many comments on this shovelling sh*t on OP...? I agree with the author entirely. In practically every field, the reason it's difficult to learn anything, starting with zero, is because you don't know what questions to ask. You need to find an in. ChatGPT is really good at this - the answers it gives provide an idea of what you don't know you don't know. Obviously, you then need to go verify the answers, but the difference is: now you know what the language you need to use to do so looks like. PS you would also need to do this if you started with Wikipedia as well.
- thealig 3y agoFinding out what you don't know to start learning is also a part of learning, and it is a bit difficult to trust LLMs like ChatGPT when it had a tendency to spout correct sounding answers that are incorrect, inaccurate etc. Search engines are much better On uncovering guides on that, specially from experts and verified sources. It's a bit of work to verify that, but then it is part of learning itself, not sure trying to punt on that to fast track your learning your whatever is going to make a meaningful difference in terms of time
- TheLML 3y agoI've found ChatGPT quite useful for both coding and learning a language. Even though I have two friends who are native speakers of the language I'm learning, I don't want to bother them with my questions all the time. Especially since ChatGPT will give great explanations about grammar and why something is said the way it is. Also makes for a great practice partner to use your vocabulary and to correct your mistakes. It has definitely helped a lot already
- scotty79 3y agoIt's fun but not necessarily accurate. Scary part is I don't know enough about the subject to tell apart truth from falshood because they are stated in exactly the same confident manner. Also most things are true with falsehoods sprinkled in between
- elif 3y agoI was initially using gpt to learn for 5-8 hours every day.. But I was bitten by a series of completely made up facts, and my skepticism has forced me to research nearly every complex response since then to confirm. This fatigue has really shut down my enthusiasm. Maybe I'll research a topic 3-4 hours a week now.
- papandada 3y agoI've learned almost everything I know through reading and listening, with very little discourse. I rarely asked questions in class, never had tutors, never went to office hours. I hesitate to post questions online. If I don't understand something, I just read ... more, or bang my head against it as trial and error. I think this is partly why I'm still looking to be wowed by this technology, personally, in terms of what it can accomplish for me. And while it could be rightly said I've made things unnecessarily hard for myself approaching life like this, I feel it has been beneficial, and enriching, to force myself to really ask, what is this person saying here? In particular, I wouldn't want GPT to lead to a general lessening of empathy.
- haswell 3y ago> And while it could be rightly said I've made things unnecessarily hard for myself approaching life like this, I feel it has been beneficial, and enriching, to force myself to really ask, what is this person saying here? I personally don’t believe there’s mutual exclusivity here. I spent the first half of my life just absorbing. I’ve spent the 2nd half of my life so far undoing the patterns of thought that can result from staying inside one’s head instead of engaging with people. In my experience, asking the person saying something what they mean is far more effective than asking myself what they mean. When I ask them, I can form real empathy. When I only ask myself, I just waste significant energy on all of the ways I imagine I could or should be empathetic. > In particular, I wouldn't want GPT to lead to a general lessening of empathy. While I have a lot of concerns about LLMs and the future of literacy, propagation if misinformation, etc, I don’t think ChatGPT is any more risk to empathy than 100 other aspects of modern life. Facebook, Twitter and Reddit seem far more responsible for the erosion of empathy, and it’s unclear how LLMs would inherently lead to a “general lessening”. I think that ship sailed a decade ago.
- papandada 3y agoWell, here instead of asking you a clarifying question about your response, I might instead ask ChatGPT. Something would be lost, in my mind. Just musing out loud.
- juujian 3y agoPuh, fun, yes. It's nice having a "conversation". But then everything that comes up I have to double check. As soon as the topic is somewhat specific, I can tell just by looking at it that the code won't work. So at the end of the day I have to go back to Google anyways.
- haswell 3y agoAnd personally I’m fine with this workflow. Having a conversation allows me to figure out what I’m trying to figure out. Once I know that, I know what to look for. To me, the value of the conversation isn’t its perfect accuracy, but the expressiveness and ease of veering in any direction that seems interesting at the moment. The efficiency gains when jumping around within a subject are incredible.
- tristanc 3y agoIn a similar situation as you, I’ve been having lots of luck using phind.com . They advertise as “the AI search engine built for developers” and its interface is a blend of google and chatgpt. You can also paste in long snippets of code or provide specific URLs you want it to use as a part of its answer. It then generates a few possible solutions with references. For me it’s consistently been much more helpful than google.
- krychu 3y agoI've been using GPT to have (insightful) educational conversations about Quake 1 source code: https://twitter.com/krychusamp/status/1649048047996014595 https://twitter.com/krychusamp/status/1649048047996014595 I always finish up by asking GPT to test my knowledge with a single-choice questionnaire. What I've observed is that the retention of the material is higher compared to "traditional" techniques. Perhaps the conversation style is more immersive, or perhaps focusing on specific knowledge gaps makes for accelerated / personalised learning. There is of course the problem of accuracy, but I feel like it's often over-stated. Even if GPT is not correct at times, it often uncovers concepts and relations that paint a better overall picture for me, and lead me to better questions and follow up actions.
- thethimble 3y agoAgreed - it seems that calling out LLM accuracy is a meme here - hyperbolically: “because LLMs can be inaccurate they are useless”. There seems to be less next-level analysis: which topics are more prone to inaccuracy, does the critique loop actually help LLMs overcome those inaccuracies, and do the benefits of LLMs outweigh the consequences of these inaccuracies?
- Vanit 3y agoObviously the risk here today is that ChatGPT isn't a trustworthy teacher, but the concept is of course absolutely riveting and obvious to everyone, which is why ChatGPT blew up on the first place. Iron out the kinks and I think it's going to be an incredible asset to humanity (not necessarily this particular LLM).
- feintruled 3y agoI find this too. With GPT there is no such thing as a stupid question. That is really liberating! You can really double check the simplest and most basic of your assumptions with no fear of judgement. And as mentioned in other comments, the assurance of receiving a good faith answer is not to be underestimated.
- mrrobot900 3y agoim reading the wealth of nations right now, using gpt on the side to help clarify long passages and decode archaic terms. it's been tremendously helpful. some actual use cases: - summarising entire chapters (summarise chapter 8 of book 1) - asking to verify my own summaries (in summary, smith writes that ... am i correct?) - explaining certain passages in ever more detail (explain ...; explain in simpler terms; im still confused, explain in more details;) --- One very interesting case is when GPT produced an error, and I had it go through the error with me. In the end GPT managed to spot its own error and correct itself. Here's an excerpt, edited for brevity: * gpt: [...] When the demand is too low, it encourages growth; when the demand is too high, it restrains growth. [...] * me: "When the demand is too low, it encourages growth; when the demand is too high, it restrains growth." is this correct? * g: Apologies for the confusion in my previous response. The correct statement should be: When the demand for labor is too low (slow), it encourages higher wages and population growth; when the demand for labor is too high (fast), it restrains population growth by adjusting wages to find the equilibrium between demand and supply. (GPT still giving the wrong answer.) * m: i am still confused. can you explain in more detail * g: [...] Smith argues that the demand for labor regulates population growth by influencing wages. If wages are too low, fewer children will be born, and the population growth will be slow. If wages are too high, more children will be born, and the population growth will be fast. [...] (At this point GPT was able to give me the correct response.) * m: so when the demand for labour is low, wages decrease and population growth slows down. when the demand is high, wages increase and population growth speeds up. correct? * g: Yes, that's correct. [...] (I pointed out that this was in contradiction with the earlier response.) * m: did you not contradict yourself? "When the demand is too low, it encourages growth; when the demand is too high, it restrains growth." * g: Apologies for the confusion in my previous response. I misunderstood your question. Let me clarify: When the demand for labor is too low, it restrains growth; when the demand is too high, it encourages growth. So, when the demand for labor is low, wages decrease, and population growth slows down. Conversely, when the demand for labor is high, wages increase, and population growth speeds up. I hope this clears up any confusion. (I then inserted the original erroneous response as a prompt, and gpt was able to "remember" that it generated the response earlier.) * m: "When the demand is too low, it encourages growth; when the demand is too high, it restrains growth." what is wrong with this passage? * g: I apologize for the confusion earlier. There is an error in the passage you provided. It should be: This demand for labor operates like the demand for any other commodity, regulating the production and growth of the population. When the demand is too low, it restrains growth; when the demand is too high, it encourages growth. This dynamic determines the rate of population growth in different countries, such as rapid growth in North America, slow and gradual growth in Europe, and a stationary population in China. --- i should mention that i am using the paid version (GPT-4). i tried the free model, but the quality was significantly worse. you can recorrect it multiple times consecutively and every time it would say that it was wrong the last time, and recorrect itself again and again.
- JohnFen 3y agoHere's the aspect of this article that I found the most fascinating, and might explain why I don't get the same level of benefit from ChatGPT as many report. If I were learning how LEDs work, I would not have wasted any time whatsoever on the search results that the author spent a lot of time on. They were obviously (to me) the wrong articles on the face of it, because they were covering aspects that weren't really what I was looking for (the wrong sort of detail and emphasis). So I think I would have been off and running pretty much immediately with the web search results rather than spending time on the clear dead ends. ChatGPT gets me there too, after enough back-and-forth, but it takes longer for me to zero in on what I'm looking for. I say this not to say that ChatGPT is in any way bad for this. I'm just noticing a difference in how the two of us engage in learning new topics. Perhaps the reality is that for some people, ChatGPT is a godsend, and for others, it's fine... but hardly an improvement for this use use case. It would explain a lot. (Also, when did learning stop being fun??)
- cyrialize 3y agoI've been using Phind [0] for specifically dev related stuff, and it's been great. I very much like that it gives me all the resources it uses. On the other hand, I feel like my experience with Phind has been so great because with all dev stuff I ask it it's always been something I could try out right away. With non-dev stuff that isn't always the case. I'd love an LLM that can do the same thing as Phind, as in providing the sources it's using, while also working for everything. [0]: https://www.phind.com/ https://www.phind.com/
- MattGrommes 3y agoOne solution to his problem with the Wikipedia being hard to learn from is to use the criminally under-known Simple Wikipedia (https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page). Just replace 'en' in a wikipedia URL with 'simple' and hopefully there will be a nice and simple version of the page. I don't see it advertised very often but I think it should be.
- emrah 3y agoI agree, Google has deteriorated so much. It just points to either doc pages and leaves all the work up to you or you get a (often outdated from 2011) pages from Stack overflow. I need to do all the filtering and stitching. I tend to get better answers from their "automated questions" which are paraphrased versions of my query. So it clearly understands what I'm after. In order to promote diversity, i would recommend perplexity.ai which offers a similar experience as chatgpt (I'm not affiliated and i have no clue what their tech stack is like) It also offers links back to pages and follow up questions etc. Highly recommended if you need to learn something new and you don't want to bang your head on the keyboard googling or ddg'ing I'll give an example. I recently needed to learn about k8s, minikube, kubectl et al for a project. I had some vague idea about the tech but nowhere near enough for what i needed to do. Google was useless because it kept taking me to doc pages which is like being lectured but i needed specific information. Perplexity was amazing in helping me with the right bit of information, example code AND links if i do want to read further