4 ms·
It is ChatGPT and it's not useful. It purposefully hides while it attempts to illuminate. It masquerades as summarizing the paper, but it's a random grab of wh
by refulgentis 4y ago
It is ChatGPT and it's not useful. It purposefully hides while it attempts to illuminate.
It masquerades as summarizing the paper, but it's a random grab of whatever OP decided to jam into the chatbox that fits in the context window, (if you check, its mostly regurgitating the abstract).
However, it presents itself as a summary as if the entire paper was read.
I'm _really_ into AI stuff but the flippant nature its used at on HN has me scared. People here are generally well-educated, considered in their decisions, and are well acquainted with tech. If HN can't avoid glaring issues with it, who can?
The top example that came to mind was someone laboriously sharing a really nice data-driven comment, someone asks source? they say ChatGPT, and acted like we were trolling for saying it hallucinates.
- smrtinsert 4y ago> People here are generally well-educated This isn't a given (anymore?).
- ttul 4y agoThe entire blog post fit into the context window. I did not use GPT-4 to summarize the whole paper. Either way, I found the summary informative after reading the blog post end-to-end in the more human manner anyway. I don't think GPT-4 missed anything crucial from the blog.
- refulgentis 4y agoI stand corrected: only 4100 tokens! It missed a _ton_ for me, it seems to pick out unique phrases and elegantly create a "skeleton" of the original. > I did not use GPT-4 to summarize the whole paper. > I don't think GPT-4 missed anything crucial from the blog. ?
- ttul 4y agoWhat do you feel would be a good summary of a similar length? I’m asking genuinely.