4 ms·

That's impressive, but not as impressive as this: https://twitter.com/InternetH0F/status/1721641836404408536 https://twitter.com/InternetH0F/status/172164183640

That's impressive, but not as impressive as this: https://twitter.com/InternetH0F/status/1721641836404408536 https://twitter.com/InternetH0F/status/1721641836404408536

TeMPOraL 3y ago
That's easy. The hard question is, in what base this answer is correct?
- prerok 3y ago
  In base pi, the pi number is 1. Similarly, if we would take any base, which is a factor of pi, we could have any number be the last digit. All the above is a joke, of course, as it does not really tackle the problem :)
  - nwellnhof 3y ago
    pi is '10' in base pi.
    - prerok 3y ago
      Nope. Is 10 actually 1 in base 10? Redacted: see below.
      - prerok 3y ago
        But you are kind of spot on regarding counting in bases with real numbers. I have not thought it through properly but it was meant as a joke anyway.
  - TeMPOraL 3y ago
    Yeah, that's what my joke is about - once we allow for fractional bases, I'm pretty sure we can find one where the last digits of Pi are the ones ChatGPT gave. The trick is, to write down the base as a number, without referencing Pi, you'll have to do the equivalent of finding those last digits in Base 10, i.e. infinite work. This is to illustrate conservation of effort ;).
speedgoose 3y ago
I didn't believe the screenshot, but this is real with ChatGPT 3.5 (the green avatar). https://chat.openai.com/share/aadf6a17-f40e-4ea6-8f5e-236bc2ebfa16 https://chat.openai.com/share/aadf6a17-f40e-4ea6-8f5e-236bc2... ChatGPT 4 gives a more correct answer: > Pi is an irrational number, meaning it has an infinite number of digits that don't repeat in a predictable pattern. So, there's no such thing as the "last" digits of pi. https://chat.openai.com/share/6a7c0221-0aca-48af-8938-e4d98eef4198 https://chat.openai.com/share/6a7c0221-0aca-48af-8938-e4d98e...
- sirk390 3y ago
  Better, but irrational numbers can have a predictable pattern like "0.110100100010000" ( E.g "0.1 10 100 1000 10000" )
  - xigoi 3y ago
    I'd argue that every computable number has “a predictable pattern” in its digits.
    - eru 3y ago
      I guess it depends. A cryptographically secure pseudorandom number generator lets me pump out a stream of digits that's certainly computable, but unless you know my private key, you won't be able to predict it. (Finding out the private key from the stream is 'computable', because the definition of computable is comfortable with running exponentially long brute force searches. But that's why 'computable' is not a useful definition in practice. You want something that captures 'tractable', not just 'possible on a Turing machine at all'.)
    - raincole 3y ago
      It a quite tautology. How do you define "predictability"? The most intuitive answer is just computability.
      - kzrdude 3y ago

That's impressive, but not as impressive as this: https://twitter.com/InternetH0F/status/1721641836404408536 https://twitter.com/InternetH0F/status/1721641836404408536

TeMPOraL 3y ago

That's easy. The hard question is, in what base this answer is correct?

prerok 3y ago
In base pi, the pi number is 1. Similarly, if we would take any base, which is a factor of pi, we could have any number be the last digit. All the above is a joke, of course, as it does not really tackle the problem :)
- nwellnhof 3y ago
  pi is '10' in base pi.
  - prerok 3y ago
    Nope. Is 10 actually 1 in base 10? Redacted: see below.
    - prerok 3y ago
      But you are kind of spot on regarding counting in bases with real numbers. I have not thought it through properly but it was meant as a joke anyway.
- TeMPOraL 3y ago
  Yeah, that's what my joke is about - once we allow for fractional bases, I'm pretty sure we can find one where the last digits of Pi are the ones ChatGPT gave. The trick is, to write down the base as a number, without referencing Pi, you'll have to do the equivalent of finding those last digits in Base 10, i.e. infinite work. This is to illustrate conservation of effort ;).

speedgoose 3y ago

I didn't believe the screenshot, but this is real with ChatGPT 3.5 (the green avatar). https://chat.openai.com/share/aadf6a17-f40e-4ea6-8f5e-236bc2ebfa16 https://chat.openai.com/share/aadf6a17-f40e-4ea6-8f5e-236bc2... ChatGPT 4 gives a more correct answer: > Pi is an irrational number, meaning it has an infinite number of digits that don't repeat in a predictable pattern. So, there's no such thing as the "last" digits of pi. https://chat.openai.com/share/6a7c0221-0aca-48af-8938-e4d98eef4198 https://chat.openai.com/share/6a7c0221-0aca-48af-8938-e4d98e...

sirk390 3y ago
Better, but irrational numbers can have a predictable pattern like "0.110100100010000" ( E.g "0.1 10 100 1000 10000" )
- xigoi 3y ago
  I'd argue that every computable number has “a predictable pattern” in its digits.
  - eru 3y ago
    I guess it depends. A cryptographically secure pseudorandom number generator lets me pump out a stream of digits that's certainly computable, but unless you know my private key, you won't be able to predict it. (Finding out the private key from the stream is 'computable', because the definition of computable is comfortable with running exponentially long brute force searches. But that's why 'computable' is not a useful definition in practice. You want something that captures 'tractable', not just 'possible on a Turing machine at all'.)
  - raincole 3y ago
    It a quite tautology. How do you define "predictability"? The most intuitive answer is just computability.
    - kzrdude 3y ago