Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. ChatGPT

ChatGPT

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
154 Posts 22 Posters 5.8k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • Doctor PhibesD Doctor Phibes

    To be honest, I don't understand AI well enough, if at all, to be able to judge how terrifying this is, but plenty of people seem to be plenty worried. I'm not completely convinced there isn't a degree of unnecessary panic at the moment.

    CopperC Offline
    CopperC Offline
    Copper
    wrote on last edited by
    #96

    @Doctor-Phibes said in ChatGPT:

    plenty of people seem to be plenty worried

    These are the same people who were worried about automobiles, covid vaccine and assault weapons.

    Relax

    1 Reply Last reply
    • Doctor PhibesD Doctor Phibes

      To be honest, I don't understand AI well enough, if at all, to be able to judge how terrifying this is, but plenty of people seem to be plenty worried. I'm not completely convinced there isn't a degree of unnecessary panic at the moment.

      Aqua LetiferA Offline
      Aqua LetiferA Offline
      Aqua Letifer
      wrote on last edited by Aqua Letifer
      #97

      @Doctor-Phibes said in ChatGPT:

      To be honest, I don't understand AI well enough, if at all, to be able to judge how terrifying this is, but plenty of people seem to be plenty worried. I'm not completely convinced there isn't a degree of unnecessary panic at the moment.

      Did you read the WaPo article? There are people out of work right now because of it.

      Please love yourself.

      Doctor PhibesD 1 Reply Last reply
      • Aqua LetiferA Aqua Letifer

        @Doctor-Phibes said in ChatGPT:

        To be honest, I don't understand AI well enough, if at all, to be able to judge how terrifying this is, but plenty of people seem to be plenty worried. I'm not completely convinced there isn't a degree of unnecessary panic at the moment.

        Did you read the WaPo article? There are people out of work right now because of it.

        Doctor PhibesD Offline
        Doctor PhibesD Offline
        Doctor Phibes
        wrote on last edited by Doctor Phibes
        #98

        @Aqua-Letifer said in ChatGPT:

        @Doctor-Phibes said in ChatGPT:

        To be honest, I don't understand AI well enough, if at all, to be able to judge how terrifying this is, but plenty of people seem to be plenty worried. I'm not completely convinced there isn't a degree of unnecessary panic at the moment.

        Did you read the WaPo article?

        Yeah, I've seen a few like this. And I feel that journalists may be writing like this partly because they're in the line of fire. I still don't really understand how it's all going to work.

        Remember how Y2K was going to end western civilization?

        And no, I'm not saying this is a lot of fuss over nothing, I just don't feel like I have a good handle on what's actually going to happen, and I'm not sure I believe anybody who says they do.

        I was only joking

        Aqua LetiferA 1 Reply Last reply
        • Doctor PhibesD Doctor Phibes

          @Aqua-Letifer said in ChatGPT:

          @Doctor-Phibes said in ChatGPT:

          To be honest, I don't understand AI well enough, if at all, to be able to judge how terrifying this is, but plenty of people seem to be plenty worried. I'm not completely convinced there isn't a degree of unnecessary panic at the moment.

          Did you read the WaPo article?

          Yeah, I've seen a few like this. And I feel that journalists may be writing like this partly because they're in the line of fire. I still don't really understand how it's all going to work.

          Remember how Y2K was going to end western civilization?

          And no, I'm not saying this is a lot of fuss over nothing, I just don't feel like I have a good handle on what's actually going to happen, and I'm not sure I believe anybody who says they do.

          Aqua LetiferA Offline
          Aqua LetiferA Offline
          Aqua Letifer
          wrote on last edited by
          #99

          @Doctor-Phibes said in ChatGPT:

          I still don't really understand how it's all going to work.

          Here, let me break it down for you:

          The offer on the table right now—as in, you can choose this today—is, "good to great work that can't scale, takes time, costs money, and involves collaborating with people who sometimes tell you no" versus "mediocre on a good day, but you get it right now, for free, you can get more of it, and no one can tell you no."

          Some companies are taking option B and laying off their writers in droves. Others are taking a middle road: training their writers on ChatGPT so they can get more done but have no loss in quality. Still others are saying no way, we're not touching any of that technology.

          The uncertainty lies in how many companies are going to choose which of these options. That'll determine how bad it is from an overall writer joblessness standpoint.

          So, sure, there's a lot of uncertainty about that. But the reality is, some people are losing their jobs. Right now. With others on the way. It's bad, but no one knows how bad it'll get.

          Please love yourself.

          Doctor PhibesD 1 Reply Last reply
          • Aqua LetiferA Aqua Letifer

            @Doctor-Phibes said in ChatGPT:

            I still don't really understand how it's all going to work.

            Here, let me break it down for you:

            The offer on the table right now—as in, you can choose this today—is, "good to great work that can't scale, takes time, costs money, and involves collaborating with people who sometimes tell you no" versus "mediocre on a good day, but you get it right now, for free, you can get more of it, and no one can tell you no."

            Some companies are taking option B and laying off their writers in droves. Others are taking a middle road: training their writers on ChatGPT so they can get more done but have no loss in quality. Still others are saying no way, we're not touching any of that technology.

            The uncertainty lies in how many companies are going to choose which of these options. That'll determine how bad it is from an overall writer joblessness standpoint.

            So, sure, there's a lot of uncertainty about that. But the reality is, some people are losing their jobs. Right now. With others on the way. It's bad, but no one knows how bad it'll get.

            Doctor PhibesD Offline
            Doctor PhibesD Offline
            Doctor Phibes
            wrote on last edited by
            #100

            @Aqua-Letifer said in ChatGPT:

            So, sure, there's a lot of uncertainty about that. But the reality is, some people are losing their jobs. Right now. With others on the way. It's bad, but no one knows how bad it'll get.

            Yes, I understand that people are losing their jobs, and I understand that this really isn't good. But I still don't understand how it's all going to work out in the medium to long-term. Technology frequently surprises people, even the experts. Bill Gates' book 'The Road Ahead' famously almost completely overlooked the importance of the internet, which was arguably the single most important innovation since the printing press - certainly in the top 5.

            I appreciate that these are really scary times, but I'm still left wondering. You're focusing on writers, for obvious reasons, but there are a ton of other jobs this could affect in ways we probably haven't even realised, sometimes for the bad, but most likely also for the good.

            I was only joking

            Aqua LetiferA 1 Reply Last reply
            • Doctor PhibesD Doctor Phibes

              @Aqua-Letifer said in ChatGPT:

              So, sure, there's a lot of uncertainty about that. But the reality is, some people are losing their jobs. Right now. With others on the way. It's bad, but no one knows how bad it'll get.

              Yes, I understand that people are losing their jobs, and I understand that this really isn't good. But I still don't understand how it's all going to work out in the medium to long-term. Technology frequently surprises people, even the experts. Bill Gates' book 'The Road Ahead' famously almost completely overlooked the importance of the internet, which was arguably the single most important innovation since the printing press - certainly in the top 5.

              I appreciate that these are really scary times, but I'm still left wondering. You're focusing on writers, for obvious reasons, but there are a ton of other jobs this could affect in ways we probably haven't even realised, sometimes for the bad, but most likely also for the good.

              Aqua LetiferA Offline
              Aqua LetiferA Offline
              Aqua Letifer
              wrote on last edited by
              #101

              @Doctor-Phibes said in ChatGPT:

              @Aqua-Letifer said in ChatGPT:

              So, sure, there's a lot of uncertainty about that. But the reality is, some people are losing their jobs. Right now. With others on the way. It's bad, but no one knows how bad it'll get.

              Yes, I understand that people are losing their jobs, and I understand that this really isn't good. But I still don't understand how it's all going to work out in the medium to long-term. Technology frequently surprises people, even the experts. Bill Gates' book 'The Road Ahead' famously almost completely overlooked the importance of the internet, which was arguably the single most important innovation since the printing press - certainly in the top 5.

              I appreciate that these are really scary times, but I'm still left wondering. You're focusing on writers, for obvious reasons, but there are a ton of other jobs this could affect in ways we probably haven't even realised, sometimes for the bad, but most likely also for the good.

              Yeah, I agree with all that. Even the focus on writers—I'm only doing so now because that's what we happen to be talking about, but it affects a lot of industries. And no one knows where we go next. This is nothing like the automobile or the internet.

              If I was betting, I'd say we'll probably end up in some kind of universal lateral move. But the devil's in the details and its individual consequences.

              Please love yourself.

              1 Reply Last reply
              • Aqua LetiferA Aqua Letifer

                @Horace said in ChatGPT:

                Losing one's job has similar emotional impact to losing one's marriage.

                Anyway it's not clear that when AI reaches superhuman intelligence, there'll be much left for humans to do. This is not an evolution of technology that leaves people without jobs, it's an evolution in the ability of robots to replace humans in nearly every definable, marketable skill. Nothing rushes in to fill that gap, in what people are needed for on the job market.

                Well, that's phase 2. And we have some time yet on that I think. Not a whole lot, but probably some.

                I'm not worried about phase 2 because it's going to upend so much that there's literally nothing to do to prepare for it. No one knows what that world will look like or to what extent humans will even participate in it.

                I'm still working on phase 1, which is a situation in which I might have to make a radical career change because there's still a concept and expectation of having a "career."

                AxtremusA Away
                AxtremusA Away
                Axtremus
                wrote on last edited by
                #102

                @Aqua-Letifer said in ChatGPT:

                No one knows what that world will look like or to what extent humans will even participate in it.

                Individual communities can go back to the very basic and live like the Amish, that should still remain an option.

                Aqua LetiferA 1 Reply Last reply
                • AxtremusA Axtremus

                  @Aqua-Letifer said in ChatGPT:

                  No one knows what that world will look like or to what extent humans will even participate in it.

                  Individual communities can go back to the very basic and live like the Amish, that should still remain an option.

                  Aqua LetiferA Offline
                  Aqua LetiferA Offline
                  Aqua Letifer
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #103

                  @Axtremus said in ChatGPT:

                  @Aqua-Letifer said in ChatGPT:

                  No one knows what that world will look like or to what extent humans will even participate in it.

                  Individual communities can go back to the very basic and live like the Amish, that should still remain an option.

                  Point. Missed.

                  Please love yourself.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  • RainmanR Offline
                    RainmanR Offline
                    Rainman
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #104

                    Hey Ax, you and me, Bud!
                    We'd have the coolest buggy, towed by the biggest damn black horse in existence. Dressed in black. So Slimming too! Yeah man, BAM (Black Amish Matter)!!

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    • AxtremusA Away
                      AxtremusA Away
                      Axtremus
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #105

                      https://www.marketwatch.com/story/lawyers-say-chatgpt-tricked-them-into-citing-fictitious-legal-research-1339ec41

                      Lawyers say ChatGPT tricked them into citing fictitious legal research

                      taiwan_girlT 1 Reply Last reply
                      • AxtremusA Axtremus

                        https://www.marketwatch.com/story/lawyers-say-chatgpt-tricked-them-into-citing-fictitious-legal-research-1339ec41

                        Lawyers say ChatGPT tricked them into citing fictitious legal research

                        taiwan_girlT Online
                        taiwan_girlT Online
                        taiwan_girl
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #106

                        @Axtremus said in ChatGPT:

                        https://www.marketwatch.com/story/lawyers-say-chatgpt-tricked-them-into-citing-fictitious-legal-research-1339ec41

                        Lawyers say ChatGPT tricked them into citing fictitious legal research

                        If the lawyer was stupid enough to use Chat GPT and do no follow up, then he deserves whatever punishment he gets.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        • AxtremusA Away
                          AxtremusA Away
                          Axtremus
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #107

                          https://www.euronews.com/next/2023/06/13/chatgpt-and-google-bard-adoption-remains-surprisingly-low

                          Low adoption of AI chat bots, according to a JP Morgan study:

                          ... only 19 per cent of the people who took part in the study said that they have used ChatGPT before, while only 9 per cent of the respondents have used the Google Bard chatbot.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          • Aqua LetiferA Offline
                            Aqua LetiferA Offline
                            Aqua Letifer
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #108

                            Yeah that's not likely to change or anything.

                            Please love yourself.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            • YellowstoneY Offline
                              YellowstoneY Offline
                              Yellowstone
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #109

                              I promise to create a very hostile environment for AI Development in 2024…

                              Make America Molten Again!

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              • AxtremusA Axtremus

                                https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/05/federal-judge-no-ai-in-my-courtroom-unless-a-human-verifies-its-accuracy/

                                Federal judge: No AI in my courtroom unless a human verifies its accuracy
                                Judge wary of AI "hallucinations," says it isn't acceptable for legal briefing.

                                For now, I think it’s a good rule.

                                AxtremusA Away
                                AxtremusA Away
                                Axtremus
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #110

                                Follow-up:

                                https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/06/lawyers-have-real-bad-day-in-court-after-citing-fake-cases-made-up-by-chatgpt/

                                A federal judge tossed a lawsuit and issued a $5,000 fine to the plaintiff's lawyers after they used ChatGPT to research court filings that cited six fake cases invented by the artificial intelligence tool made by OpenAI. …
                                … More embarrassingly for the lawyers, they are required to send letters to six real judges who were "falsely identified as the author of the fake" opinions cited in their legal filings. …

                                $5,000 fine is likely too lenient considering the lawyers could likely have billed more than that with merely a day’s work.

                                George KG 1 Reply Last reply
                                • AxtremusA Axtremus

                                  Follow-up:

                                  https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/06/lawyers-have-real-bad-day-in-court-after-citing-fake-cases-made-up-by-chatgpt/

                                  A federal judge tossed a lawsuit and issued a $5,000 fine to the plaintiff's lawyers after they used ChatGPT to research court filings that cited six fake cases invented by the artificial intelligence tool made by OpenAI. …
                                  … More embarrassingly for the lawyers, they are required to send letters to six real judges who were "falsely identified as the author of the fake" opinions cited in their legal filings. …

                                  $5,000 fine is likely too lenient considering the lawyers could likely have billed more than that with merely a day’s work.

                                  George KG Offline
                                  George KG Offline
                                  George K
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #111

                                  @Axtremus said in ChatGPT:

                                  $5,000 fine is likely too lenient considering the lawyers could likely have billed more than that with merely a day’s work.

                                  Gotta protect your own, dont'cha know.

                                  "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08

                                  The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  • taiwan_girlT Online
                                    taiwan_girlT Online
                                    taiwan_girl
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #112

                                    https://www.laptopmag.com/news/wormgpt-chatgpts-evil-twin-should-have-us-all-deeply-concerned

                                    markM 1 Reply Last reply
                                    • taiwan_girlT taiwan_girl

                                      https://www.laptopmag.com/news/wormgpt-chatgpts-evil-twin-should-have-us-all-deeply-concerned

                                      markM Offline
                                      markM Offline
                                      mark
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #113

                                      @taiwan_girl said in ChatGPT:

                                      https://www.laptopmag.com/news/wormgpt-chatgpts-evil-twin-should-have-us-all-deeply-concerned

                                      Silly human race.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      • George KG Offline
                                        George KG Offline
                                        George K
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #114

                                        ChatGPT leans liberal, new research shows

                                        https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/08/16/chatgpt-ai-political-bias-research/

                                        "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08

                                        The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        • jon-nycJ Online
                                          jon-nycJ Online
                                          jon-nyc
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #115

                                          The interesting question is whether it leans liberal only because the data set on which it was trained leans liberal, or if there was some intentionality behind it.

                                          Only non-witches get due process.

                                          • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                                          KlausK 1 Reply Last reply
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups