4 ms·

> I think this speaks to the bubble you're in and how your kind of software development probably represents 0.1% of what's out there. Grandparent specifically

> I think this speaks to the bubble you're in and how your kind of software development probably represents 0.1% of what's out there. Grandparent specifically said they find ChatGPT useful for things outside their wheelhouse: >> [...]troubleshooting situations that flow into me - working in areas that I have the slimmest of backgrounds in It sounds to me like it may not be safe to use ChatGPT if you can't check its work.

bmitc 3y ago
Yea, I tried using it like that and got a bunch of "you're using it wrong responses".
- meiraleal 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - sangnoir 3y ago
    This comment sounds a lot like "Have fun staying poor", as applied to AI rather than crypto.
    - meiraleal 3y ago
      [flagged]
avion23 3y ago
Not the original poster, but here are some examples: - Paste a bunch of log code about which I have no idea. Ask to identify and explain the problem. - Wireshark / dmesg / OpenWrt configuration pasting, ask to fix the problem. For instance, I fixed a Wi-Fi issue in a heterogeneous setup, which turned out to be caused by a stray DHCPv6 server. - Paste C code, along with an error log, and ask to fix the problem. - Paste my program and a sample. Ask to extend my program. - Proofread and format Markdown nicely. - Paste government letters, asking for a response that includes <what I want>. - Paste a chat log and obtain documentation. - Paste a tax declaration, and ask to check for consistency. - Paste my code and ask for critique. When discussing versions, people often confuse versions 3.5 and 4. I am always referring to version 4. Keep in mind that ChatGPT has been seriously and intentionally downgraded since March. This debate frequently leaves me wondering if I'm encountering a coordinated effort by bots. The examples I listed above come very naturally to me. I can't understand why people don't try to paste whatever they're working on and check the results. If it's too complex, asking it to critique instead of create, because that's easier. It feels as though there's an effort to shape public opinion into viewing these tools as "immature" and suitable only for edge cases.
- sangnoir 3y ago
  > This debate frequently leaves me wondering if I'm encountering a coordinated effort by bots. Stay classy. The rest of your comment would have been much better without this ad hominem.
  - avion23 3y ago
    It wasn't meant ad hominem, I am really wondering. I feel in a bubble. I once spent an hour researching the responses on reddit and hackernews. Turned out if these profiles are fake, then they are really good. F.e. age is >5 years, they argue about sport teams and seem really human.
- aprdm 3y ago
  Yeah I think the people who haven't found value are people who either don't have strong communication skills hence cannot articulate what they need OR work in very speciailized fields - either way they're clearly the minority seeing how many paying users chatgtp has and how fast they got there
  - LouisSayers 3y ago
    > don't have strong communication skills hence cannot articulate Basically this - even in a highly specialised field you would still find value in it if you're providing enough context and describing the problem properly. People don't want to hear that they're poor communicators - it's much easier to blame the tech.
    - bmitc 3y ago
      > People don't want to hear that they're poor communicators - it's much easier to blame the tech. It's just hard to even know what to say to this. So you are implying that the problem lies with the human, who holds years of experience in education, problem solving, communication, etc., and not the "AI", which has no experience in any of that and has no real thought processes or problem solving or reasoning abilities? And people say ChatGPT is over-hyped!

bmitc 3y ago

Yea, I tried using it like that and got a bunch of "you're using it wrong responses".

meiraleal 3y ago
[flagged]
- sangnoir 3y ago
  This comment sounds a lot like "Have fun staying poor", as applied to AI rather than crypto.
  - meiraleal 3y ago
    [flagged]

avion23 3y ago

Not the original poster, but here are some examples: - Paste a bunch of log code about which I have no idea. Ask to identify and explain the problem. - Wireshark / dmesg / OpenWrt configuration pasting, ask to fix the problem. For instance, I fixed a Wi-Fi issue in a heterogeneous setup, which turned out to be caused by a stray DHCPv6 server. - Paste C code, along with an error log, and ask to fix the problem. - Paste my program and a sample. Ask to extend my program. - Proofread and format Markdown nicely. - Paste government letters, asking for a response that includes <what I want>. - Paste a chat log and obtain documentation. - Paste a tax declaration, and ask to check for consistency. - Paste my code and ask for critique. When discussing versions, people often confuse versions 3.5 and 4. I am always referring to version 4. Keep in mind that ChatGPT has been seriously and intentionally downgraded since March. This debate frequently leaves me wondering if I'm encountering a coordinated effort by bots. The examples I listed above come very naturally to me. I can't understand why people don't try to paste whatever they're working on and check the results. If it's too complex, asking it to critique instead of create, because that's easier. It feels as though there's an effort to shape public opinion into viewing these tools as "immature" and suitable only for edge cases.

sangnoir 3y ago
> This debate frequently leaves me wondering if I'm encountering a coordinated effort by bots. Stay classy. The rest of your comment would have been much better without this ad hominem.
- avion23 3y ago
  It wasn't meant ad hominem, I am really wondering. I feel in a bubble. I once spent an hour researching the responses on reddit and hackernews. Turned out if these profiles are fake, then they are really good. F.e. age is >5 years, they argue about sport teams and seem really human.
aprdm 3y ago
Yeah I think the people who haven't found value are people who either don't have strong communication skills hence cannot articulate what they need OR work in very speciailized fields - either way they're clearly the minority seeing how many paying users chatgtp has and how fast they got there
- LouisSayers 3y ago
  > don't have strong communication skills hence cannot articulate Basically this - even in a highly specialised field you would still find value in it if you're providing enough context and describing the problem properly. People don't want to hear that they're poor communicators - it's much easier to blame the tech.
  - bmitc 3y ago
    > People don't want to hear that they're poor communicators - it's much easier to blame the tech. It's just hard to even know what to say to this. So you are implying that the problem lies with the human, who holds years of experience in education, problem solving, communication, etc., and not the "AI", which has no experience in any of that and has no real thought processes or problem solving or reasoning abilities? And people say ChatGPT is over-hyped!