3 ms·

> The reason why you see rational people believe the AI hype is that AI is a lot better than you give it credit for. They are right. I am sorry, but you are mi

> The reason why you see rational people believe the AI hype is that AI is a lot better than you give it credit for. They are right. I am sorry, but you are mistaken. There are no AI. The "AI" that is being mongered today is just a salespeople buzz word for Large Language Model technology, which is just that, a language model. It can be used to generate seemingly coherent text, but it can not reason. > Would I use it to build a complex app? No. But it is capable of building a whole app. It only works for you as you accept lowering the bar of that would pass as an "app". I mean of course any kind of normal app. Say Microsoft Paint for example. Show me ChatGPT able to create a full app like that based on business logic you prompted.

JimDabell 3y ago
> It only works for you as you accept lowering the bar of that would pass as an "app". I asked it to create an app, it created the app I wanted. That’s not “lowering the bar”. You’re just redefining words to prop up your incorrect claims.
- shzhdbi09gv8ioi 3y ago
  Okay. Enjoy your AI infused career where you can knock out hello world apps in just a few minutes.
- yosito 3y ago
  Prove it.
ben_w 3y ago
> it can not reason. As someone with an A-level in philosophy: What is reason? > I mean of course any kind of normal app. Say Microsoft Paint for example. The original, or the current one? Ironically, I think either would be a case where ChatGPT works best. The features in a raster graphics tool are very well isolated from each other. I'd expect ChatGPT to face-plant much more with any meta-level stuff, so a database that doesn't have a 1-1 correspondence with whatever appears in a UI for example. Or physics sims where you've got several layers of indirection that all need to be correct. I've never been able to get a complete working Navier–Stokes simulator out of it, for example.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- shzhdbi09gv8ioi 3y ago
  > As someone with an A-level in philosophy: What is reason? Maybe you are better off answering that question then. But I would define ability to reason as the ability to make logic conclusions based on input from a feedback loop. Let's use programming as an example. You write some code you think will work. You run it. It outputs the wrong values. You reason about the code, realize your mistake. Fix the code. Run again. It outputs the correct values. ChatGPT cannot do any of this. All it can do, is spit out text that it deems probable to belong to previous text it already generated. This is based on probability, but it completely lacks a reasoning part and a feedback loop. > The original, or the current one? Ironically, I think either would be a case where ChatGPT works best. Show me a prompt that produces either one.
  - ben_w 3y ago
    > ChatGPT cannot do any of this. All it can do, is spit out text that it deems probable to belong to previous text it already generated. This is based on probability, but it completely lacks a reasoning part and a feedback loop. 50% of the time, if you give it source code and an error, it can fix the source code and tell you why. The other half I still get paid for. > Show me a prompt that produces either one. K, if I remember by the time I've done the higher priority things, I'll send you a repo with as much of it as I can be arsed to ask for to prove the point, along with the share link to the chat session.
    - ben_w 3y ago
      > Show me a prompt that produces either one. Note how you only need to ask for each feature and in it goes. Sometimes there's a bug or three, but you can generally fix them by describing them. https://chat.openai.com/share/e2a6b513-c088-449d-8d8f-4f4c73892f11 https://chat.openai.com/share/e2a6b513-c088-449d-8d8f-4f4c73... I won't ask for the rest of the features, because it's boring. What I bring to the market right now, might be merely knowing what to ask. -- Oh yeah, I said repo as well. Note the commits are copy pasting blindly. I don't do JS professionally, I'm an iOS dev: https://github.com/BenWheatley/JSPaint https://github.com/BenWheatley/JSPaint

JimDabell 3y ago

> It only works for you as you accept lowering the bar of that would pass as an "app". I asked it to create an app, it created the app I wanted. That’s not “lowering the bar”. You’re just redefining words to prop up your incorrect claims.

shzhdbi09gv8ioi 3y ago
Okay. Enjoy your AI infused career where you can knock out hello world apps in just a few minutes.
yosito 3y ago
Prove it.

ben_w 3y ago

> it can not reason. As someone with an A-level in philosophy: What is reason? > I mean of course any kind of normal app. Say Microsoft Paint for example. The original, or the current one? Ironically, I think either would be a case where ChatGPT works best. The features in a raster graphics tool are very well isolated from each other. I'd expect ChatGPT to face-plant much more with any meta-level stuff, so a database that doesn't have a 1-1 correspondence with whatever appears in a UI for example. Or physics sims where you've got several layers of indirection that all need to be correct. I've never been able to get a complete working Navier–Stokes simulator out of it, for example.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
shzhdbi09gv8ioi 3y ago
> As someone with an A-level in philosophy: What is reason? Maybe you are better off answering that question then. But I would define ability to reason as the ability to make logic conclusions based on input from a feedback loop. Let's use programming as an example. You write some code you think will work. You run it. It outputs the wrong values. You reason about the code, realize your mistake. Fix the code. Run again. It outputs the correct values. ChatGPT cannot do any of this. All it can do, is spit out text that it deems probable to belong to previous text it already generated. This is based on probability, but it completely lacks a reasoning part and a feedback loop. > The original, or the current one? Ironically, I think either would be a case where ChatGPT works best. Show me a prompt that produces either one.
- ben_w 3y ago
  > ChatGPT cannot do any of this. All it can do, is spit out text that it deems probable to belong to previous text it already generated. This is based on probability, but it completely lacks a reasoning part and a feedback loop. 50% of the time, if you give it source code and an error, it can fix the source code and tell you why. The other half I still get paid for. > Show me a prompt that produces either one. K, if I remember by the time I've done the higher priority things, I'll send you a repo with as much of it as I can be arsed to ask for to prove the point, along with the share link to the chat session.
  - ben_w 3y ago
    > Show me a prompt that produces either one. Note how you only need to ask for each feature and in it goes. Sometimes there's a bug or three, but you can generally fix them by describing them. https://chat.openai.com/share/e2a6b513-c088-449d-8d8f-4f4c73892f11 https://chat.openai.com/share/e2a6b513-c088-449d-8d8f-4f4c73... I won't ask for the rest of the features, because it's boring. What I bring to the market right now, might be merely knowing what to ask. -- Oh yeah, I said repo as well. Note the commits are copy pasting blindly. I don't do JS professionally, I'm an iOS dev: https://github.com/BenWheatley/JSPaint https://github.com/BenWheatley/JSPaint