Re:ChatGPT: The Slickest Con Artist of All Time
by VBprogrammer on Friday February 03, 2023 @11:12AM
(#34643054)
I think you and I have different definitions of not generally well understood. I would be impressed if more than 1 in 1000 people could describe it to the level of "it's a planetary gearbox with 2 electric motors used as inputs and outputs to control the effective gear ratio".
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:ChatGPT: The Slickest Con Artist of All Time
by logifail on Friday February 03, 2023 @11:56AM
(#34643847)
> I would be impressed if more than 1 in 1000 people could describe it
Q: What use is it attempting to measure ChatGPT's capabilities on something vs the average person on the street, or vs the average user with access to google.com? What does that actually tell us?
Maybe I'm showing my age, but if one wanted to learn or discover something, wouldn't one first typically try and find a reliable source/expert in that field or subject?
Re:ChatGPT: The Slickest Con Artist of All Time
by enragedcacti on Friday February 03, 2023 @11:58AM
(#34643882)
ahh, I misunderstood what you meant. In that case can you explain to me why its meaningful that chatGPT can sometimes explain things for which there are tons of resources online to learn about them but that a lot of people aren't familiar with? I legitimately just don't understand why that is an interesting bar to clear, especially given that it can also unpredictably lie about some aspects of the thing its explaining.
It would perhaps be interesting if it were such a hard topic that only 1 in 1000 could be capable of understanding it, but I would hazard a guess that most people familiar with the prius who don't understand its drivetrain probably don't understand it because they don't care, not because its too complicated to understand.