Re:AI's Jurassic Park Moment, a real and imminent threat to ...
by Multicomp on Tuesday December 20, 2022 @08:54PM
(#34075735)
This is how I've used chatgpt as well. A primer for brainstorming that can wander on any tangents you are after
Re:AI's Jurassic Park Moment, a real and imminent threat to ...
by stanete on Wednesday December 21, 2022 @01:04AM
(#34077247)
I’ve found that the more context I give to it, the better it is to help me solving a problem. If I spend a bunch of minutes giving info about what I’m doing, why I’m doing it and what I personally know about the problem space, it will usually help me to either explore more or to arrive at the solution faster.
When I talk about coaching I meant that I told ChatGPT to answer only with questions. In a way, ChatGPT is good at having socratic conversations. Sometimes it gets out of character but it depends mostly on your answers or questions.
Re:AI's Jurassic Park Moment, a real and imminent threat to ...
by Molomby on Wednesday December 21, 2022 @02:11AM
(#34077585)
Keep in mind that...
> The model is able to reference up to approximately 3000 words (or 4000 tokens) from the current conversation - any information beyond that is not stored. (https://help.openai.com/en/articles/6787051-does-chatgpt-rem...)
So if you overflow that it'll loose context.
For work I used ChatGPT to write a very specific programming problem and it wasn't a solution you'd ever copy/paste...the lack of context to the surrounding system means that's impractical 99% of the time outside of toy problems.
But it was still super useful for getting my brain working and suggesting a really good basic structure it would have taken me 3-4 failure cycles to get to.
The same exists in DALL-E/GPT for corporate art generation, writing 'essays', or stories or w/e. It's almost never producing the end product (besides toy problems).
So, if it can't do that in the first place, why evaluate it as if that's what it's supposed to be?