I take a lot of these articles to be pushing back against the hype surrounding ChatGPT, I mean the average person out there genuinely believes that it is basically a fully conscious AI because it can look and act like a person.
So I think skepticism is warranted and we need people understanding what this tool actually does.
I bet if we put the microscope on Gary's past 20 years or anyone else's for that matter, we can find plenty of dubious samples. Who hasn't ever shit posted?
The one thing I had to think about as a result was exactly how much this technology costs for every single query. I think being able to monetize will be an interesting long term question. Sure MS is throwing boat loads of money now because they can maybe disrupt large percentages from Google now, but three-five years, do we really see this being cost effective?
The Avatar 2 release date being in the past doesn't have big subjective bias :)
Saying it's a tool means nothing. Some tools are too dangerous to be used, like nuclear weapons, and I also believe AI falls under this same category.
ChatGPT is an ignoramus validation tool.
What I find remarkable is how many HN folks seem to fall into this category, or at least come out of the woodwork to discount GPT in particular. This being a technology community it's quite surprising.
I assume it's not due to indexing, but rather due to all the hard manual labour required to markup the training data.
All these articles.. what exactly are you saying that isn’t obvious?
Use GPT for things that don’t have a big subjective bias. Use it for things it is a good fit for.
Also it requires constant indexing. You’re never going to get up to date results unless that technology changes and it can be more real time. That’s why open ai chat gpt says it was trained on data from like 2021.
People who complain about these basic things probably aren’t creative enough to take a technology and run with it.