6 ms·

> solving logic problems > generating text based on recognizing familiar patterns That's the same thing.

i_call_solo 3y ago
Yes, but it's only able to solve problems that humans have already solved. The Eureka moment is when it starts solving problems that humans have not.
epiccoleman 3y ago
It really isn't.
cscurmudgeon 3y ago
This is as insightful/true as saying logic is computation and GPT since does some computation, GPT can do all logic.
aetherson 3y ago
Here is me asking ChatGPT the classic simple wolf/sheep/cabbage logic question, but changing things so that the sheep eats the wolf, the wolf eats the rutabega, and the rutabega eats the sheep. ChatGPT immediately screws it up because it isn't actually solving the logic problem, it's just pattern-matching, and the strong pattern is for the wolf to eat the sheep. https://chat.openai.com/share/e9b88c45-e69b-4da4-b423-004d07879f7f https://chat.openai.com/share/e9b88c45-e69b-4da4-b423-004d07... EDIT: As noted in a subthread, I outclevered myself and also a bunch of human commentators, as the problem I proposed doesn't have a solution and neither ChatGPT, I, and also other presumably human commentators correctly identified that -- I had everything eat something, and the normal wolf/sheep/cabbage of course has the cabbage eating nothing. When I tried again with sheep-eats-wolf, wolf-eats-rutabaga, rutabaga-eats-nothing, it correctly solved the problem on the first try. https://chat.openai.com/share/5a2700de-1850-4f25-8adf-2d2b978bccaf https://chat.openai.com/share/5a2700de-1850-4f25-8adf-2d2b97...
- CamperBob2 3y ago
  Great, now try it with the current version. ------------------ The scenario you've described is a variation of a classic river crossing puzzle. Here's a step-by-step solution to get the wolf, sheep, and rutabaga across the river safely: First Trip: Take the sheep across the river and leave it on the other side. Return alone to the original side. Current status: Sheep is on the opposite side. Wolf and rutabaga are on the original side. Second Trip: Take the rutabaga across the river. Leave the rutabaga on the other side, but take the sheep back with you to the original side. Current status: Rutabaga is on the opposite side. Wolf and sheep are on the original side. Third Trip: Take the wolf across the river and leave it there. Return alone to the original side. Current status: Wolf and rutabaga are on the opposite side. Sheep is on the original side. Fourth Trip: Finally, take the sheep across the river. Result: All three (wolf, sheep, and rutabaga) are on the opposite side of the river safely. This solution ensures that at no point are the sheep and rutabaga left alone together (since the rutabaga would eat the sheep), nor are the wolf and rutabaga left alone (since the wolf would eat the rutabaga). Likewise, the sheep and wolf are not left alone without the rutabaga, which would result in the sheep eating the wolf.
  - what 3y ago
    > First Trip: Take the sheep across the river and leave it on the other side. Return alone to the original side. This would leave the wolf and the rutabaga alone and the wolf eats the rutabaga. So it’s a fail? It even explains why it would be a fail, but claims it’s not: > This solution ensures that at no point are … the wolf and rutabaga left alone (since the wolf would eat the rutabaga).
    - CamperBob2 3y ago
      You're right, I apologize for my mistake. The problem has no solution. Initiating self-destruct sequence. (It actually shows no sign of being stuck on the pattern of "wolf eats sheep," but no matter how many times you tell it it's wrong, it never breaks out of the pattern of guessing at incorrect solutions.)

Yes, but it's only able to solve problems that humans have already solved. The Eureka moment is when it starts solving problems that humans have not.

epiccoleman 3y ago

It really isn't.

cscurmudgeon 3y ago

This is as insightful/true as saying logic is computation and GPT since does some computation, GPT can do all logic.

aetherson 3y ago

Here is me asking ChatGPT the classic simple wolf/sheep/cabbage logic question, but changing things so that the sheep eats the wolf, the wolf eats the rutabega, and the rutabega eats the sheep. ChatGPT immediately screws it up because it isn't actually solving the logic problem, it's just pattern-matching, and the strong pattern is for the wolf to eat the sheep. https://chat.openai.com/share/e9b88c45-e69b-4da4-b423-004d07879f7f https://chat.openai.com/share/e9b88c45-e69b-4da4-b423-004d07... EDIT: As noted in a subthread, I outclevered myself and also a bunch of human commentators, as the problem I proposed doesn't have a solution and neither ChatGPT, I, and also other presumably human commentators correctly identified that -- I had everything eat something, and the normal wolf/sheep/cabbage of course has the cabbage eating nothing. When I tried again with sheep-eats-wolf, wolf-eats-rutabaga, rutabaga-eats-nothing, it correctly solved the problem on the first try. https://chat.openai.com/share/5a2700de-1850-4f25-8adf-2d2b978bccaf https://chat.openai.com/share/5a2700de-1850-4f25-8adf-2d2b97...

CamperBob2 3y ago
Great, now try it with the current version. ------------------ The scenario you've described is a variation of a classic river crossing puzzle. Here's a step-by-step solution to get the wolf, sheep, and rutabaga across the river safely: First Trip: Take the sheep across the river and leave it on the other side. Return alone to the original side. Current status: Sheep is on the opposite side. Wolf and rutabaga are on the original side. Second Trip: Take the rutabaga across the river. Leave the rutabaga on the other side, but take the sheep back with you to the original side. Current status: Rutabaga is on the opposite side. Wolf and sheep are on the original side. Third Trip: Take the wolf across the river and leave it there. Return alone to the original side. Current status: Wolf and rutabaga are on the opposite side. Sheep is on the original side. Fourth Trip: Finally, take the sheep across the river. Result: All three (wolf, sheep, and rutabaga) are on the opposite side of the river safely. This solution ensures that at no point are the sheep and rutabaga left alone together (since the rutabaga would eat the sheep), nor are the wolf and rutabaga left alone (since the wolf would eat the rutabaga). Likewise, the sheep and wolf are not left alone without the rutabaga, which would result in the sheep eating the wolf.
- what 3y ago
  > First Trip: Take the sheep across the river and leave it on the other side. Return alone to the original side. This would leave the wolf and the rutabaga alone and the wolf eats the rutabaga. So it’s a fail? It even explains why it would be a fail, but claims it’s not: > This solution ensures that at no point are … the wolf and rutabaga left alone (since the wolf would eat the rutabaga).
  - CamperBob2 3y ago
    You're right, I apologize for my mistake. The problem has no solution. Initiating self-destruct sequence. (It actually shows no sign of being stuck on the pattern of "wolf eats sheep," but no matter how many times you tell it it's wrong, it never breaks out of the pattern of guessing at incorrect solutions.)