ChatGPT
-
@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.
-
@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.
Proud supporter of Plan 2525. Everything you think, do and say will be in the pill you took today.
-
@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.
-
@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-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.
-
Lawyers say ChatGPT tricked them into citing fictitious legal research
-
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.
-
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.
-
Yeah that's not likely to change or anything.
-
I promise to create a very hostile environment for AI Development in 2024…
-
Follow-up:
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.
-
-
@taiwan_girl said in ChatGPT:
https://www.laptopmag.com/news/wormgpt-chatgpts-evil-twin-should-have-us-all-deeply-concerned
Silly human race.
-
ChatGPT leans liberal, new research shows
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/08/16/chatgpt-ai-political-bias-research/
-
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.
-
A young AI that isn’t a little liberal has no heart. A mature AI that isn’t conservative has no brain…
-
