4 ms·

I've used it to hit on women in dating apps. It works really well in being ultra smooth. I've used it to craft custom cover letters for jobs I got offers for.

I've used it to hit on women in dating apps. It works really well in being ultra smooth. I've used it to craft custom cover letters for jobs I got offers for. I used it to respond to emails, I used it to create stories, I used it to snazz up things that I wrote. I used it to help me code. I could use it to respond to you and you'd be none the wiser. I do agree that you need to review the work. But that does not mean it's useless as the writing it produces can be continuously modified via further queries and often the writing is much more superior than anything I would otherwise produce just with a few flaws here and there.

t43562 3y ago
Those women might be disappointed when they meet you, the jobs must have interviewed you in person and decided that you were sutiable anyhow despite your cover letter. ...and what is the point of creating stories if your thought hasn't gone into them? It writes incorrect regular expressions and meaningless makefiles and you have to be an expert to spot some of the mistakes which means you can only be safe about using it if you don't need it that much anyhow.
- corethree 3y ago
  You're just giving excuses to account for your bias. First up I got laid. Second the cover letter is usually a screen for companies that consider it if it's not good you don't even make it to the interview. I don't understand why meaningless makefiles and regular expressions discount all the things gpt gets right. It's obvious the tool is flawed but it's also obvious it gets shit right many many times. If you haven't worked with an LLM to do creative stuff it's like working with a partner. You can bounce ideas off of it, tell it to make things better. It's not as good as a human obviously but it's good enough that can be used as a literal intelligent writing assistant. There's this huge biased desire from certain people to dismiss LLMs completely. I don't really understand it and the irony is they call everyone else biases. Look nobody is saying LLMs are human level sentient beings. It's obvious to everyone that these things are imperfect. The furthest people go in supporting LLMs is saying that it sometimes produces remarkable output and it sometimes produces bad output. That's a balanced view and not biased. But there's a huge contingent of people saying LLMs are completely useless and produce nothing but garbage. All output is bad and that is unquestionable. This group is real and is extremely biased and you seem to be a member, no offense.
  - Kerb_ 3y ago
    >First up I got laid Now this is anecdotal evidence I can get behind

t43562 3y ago

Those women might be disappointed when they meet you, the jobs must have interviewed you in person and decided that you were sutiable anyhow despite your cover letter. ...and what is the point of creating stories if your thought hasn't gone into them? It writes incorrect regular expressions and meaningless makefiles and you have to be an expert to spot some of the mistakes which means you can only be safe about using it if you don't need it that much anyhow.

corethree 3y ago
You're just giving excuses to account for your bias. First up I got laid. Second the cover letter is usually a screen for companies that consider it if it's not good you don't even make it to the interview. I don't understand why meaningless makefiles and regular expressions discount all the things gpt gets right. It's obvious the tool is flawed but it's also obvious it gets shit right many many times. If you haven't worked with an LLM to do creative stuff it's like working with a partner. You can bounce ideas off of it, tell it to make things better. It's not as good as a human obviously but it's good enough that can be used as a literal intelligent writing assistant. There's this huge biased desire from certain people to dismiss LLMs completely. I don't really understand it and the irony is they call everyone else biases. Look nobody is saying LLMs are human level sentient beings. It's obvious to everyone that these things are imperfect. The furthest people go in supporting LLMs is saying that it sometimes produces remarkable output and it sometimes produces bad output. That's a balanced view and not biased. But there's a huge contingent of people saying LLMs are completely useless and produce nothing but garbage. All output is bad and that is unquestionable. This group is real and is extremely biased and you seem to be a member, no offense.
- Kerb_ 3y ago
  >First up I got laid Now this is anecdotal evidence I can get behind