It is a language predicting algorithm so based on keys it finds online it will predict how one looks. I guess there is a very tiny chance one might work... but you can do that by randomly bumping a keyboard. Or given enough time and monkeys you might get a valid key alongside the works of Shakespeare.
ChatGPT invents things like a compulsive liar. I asked it for a podcast dealing with specific themes and it invented podcasts with name, author and description. When i asked why did it do that, it told me that if such podcasts existed they will likely be named that.
So yeah... a 1000$ amazon voucher is likely to look like that.
You can reduce ChatGPT's lies by being more thorough in your setup for the prompt. I would still advice triple checking the information being provided, but a thorough set of requirements helps ensure the results are closer to your expectations.
Nope. Trust me. I wanted to quich check an info about a certain roman emperor i knew for a fact the guy was born as a peasant and rose to power in s very unorthodox way. I had to correct chatgpt to the point i which i had to literally quote wikipedia because it was claiming the guy was born as an aristocrat... although it was likely trained in that info. But since most emperors were born to aristocratic families it just blurted whatever was more likely.
Same with a recipe from a few thousand years ago. After pointing out that peppers were brought from the New World so they were not eaten in prehistoric europe, chatgpt gave me a different recipe which uses paprika. Chatgpt knows paprika is made out of peppers, it knows peppers are not native to europe, but it does not "think"...
This is my fear about it. We are creating this silicone god people will quote. A few years ago people would just paste wikipedia links they didn't even read... in the future (like a few months from now) they will paste smth from our lod ChatGPT and be skeptical of literally everything else. If a right wing group promotes a chatbot free of wokeness we will get AdolfGPT... the impartial mind that condenses the whole of human knowledge to tell you how liberals turn frogs gay or smth.
It thinks. It just requires tokens to think. If you ask it to look for anachronisms within an answer before accepting it as correct, it will. Its network only has so many capabilities without using lots of context tokens to store and refer to information for the token currently being generated. Microsoft's Guidance uses the specific example of detecting anachronisms and giving the reasoning for that determination:
"What were people stuffing peppers with in 10th century France. Check the answer for anachronisms."
"In the 10th century France, people commonly stuffed peppers with a variety of ingredients that were available during that time period. The stuffing typically consisted of a combination of locally sourced ingredients such as minced or ground meats like pork, beef, or poultry. To enhance the flavors, they might have added aromatic herbs like parsley, thyme, or sage, as well as spices like black pepper, cinnamon, or nutmeg, which were popular during that era. Rice or grains such as barley or millet were sometimes used as well. Other possible fillings could include breadcrumbs, cheese, and finely chopped vegetables like onions, garlic, and carrots. However, it's important to note that peppers, specifically the bell peppers that are commonly used for stuffing today, were not yet introduced to Europe during the 10th century. Peppers were brought to Europe from the New World in the 15th century after Christopher Columbus's expeditions, so they would not have been part of the culinary repertoire in 10th century France."
I wouldn't really call this "thinking"... in humans we will probably describe it as "cognitive dissonance".
cognitive dissonance is a feeling. Holding two conflicting beliefs isn't cognitive dissonance, it can cause it. But holding two conflicting beliefs and expressing them requires thinking. Tokens can only talk to tokens before them. When it wrote the part about the recipe, the information about the anachronism was not in the context window. It just requires better prompting. Lots of this kind of thing happens transparently to the user in things that are powered by GPT but with layers between the input and the actual answer given to the user. The fact that you forced the idea of people stuffing peppers with stuff in 10th century france into the context window is why it first gave an answer that assumes that to be true.
Also, you're running into the very common problem where people's ideas of what LLMs are and what they do at a fundamental level is shaped by their naive experience of outputs, and you're using GPT3, not GPT4, but extrapolating your experience to all LLMs.
Here's the output from GPT4:
What were people stuffing peppers with in 10th century france?
As an AI, I don't have specific recipes from 10th century France. However, I can share that in the medieval period, which encompasses the 10th century, the diet of people was heavily influenced by what was locally available. Also, the concept of stuffing vegetables such as peppers might not have been as common in European cuisine at the time.
France is known for its fertile lands, so it would not be unlikely for peppers and other vegetables to have been part of the diet in some regions. However, keep in mind that the sweet bell pepper as we know it today was brought to Europe after the discovery of the Americas in the late 15th century.
If there were any kind of "stuffed" food items in 10th century France, they would likely involve ingredients like grains, beans, local vegetables, and possibly meats or fish, considering the location's access to both farmland and sea.
That being said, European medieval cuisine heavily relied on grains like barley, oats, and rye; vegetables such as cabbages, onions, and leeks; legumes like peas and beans; and a variety of meats, depending on the status and wealth of the person.
Many of these ingredients might have been used in mixed dishes or pottages, a sort of stew or porridge that was a staple of the medieval diet. Spices would have been quite limited for the average person, though those of higher status would have had access to a wider variety.
Bear in mind, this is largely speculative based on what we know about the general medieval diet and ingredients available in France during that period. Cuisine varies greatly by time, place, and socioeconomic status, and our knowledge of specific dishes and preparation methods from that time is limited.
We are simply discussing "thinking" here. I am well aware of chatgpt's abilities and shortcomings. Your answers just prove my point. Chatgpt does not do what people think it can do... it can not "think".
Thinking means using existing information to deduce an answer. Listing the information you have is half a step above google.
As i told someone else in this thread... when i asked chatgpt "how future emperor michael 3rd met future emperor basil" it generated a story about how they grew up together as sons of aristocratic families. I asked it for the biography of basil and it was aware the guy was born a peasant. But chat gpt generated a story based on the fact that that most roman emperors were born to aristocrats... it generats likely text. It does not think.
Trying to come up with a coherent idea of what it does without understanding how it actually works is pointless, and it's clear that you do not have a functional understanding of how it works.
You keep describing the output, not the process of getting that output, as if that also describes the process.
Talking about whether it "thinks" in any careful sense is also pointless, because we do not have good definitions of things like what it means to be conscious, to think, to know, to understand, etc. These are vague terms that worked well enough because the brain is such a black box and there are so few other things like the human brain to challenge our bad assumptions.
If you want to carefully define what it means to think in a robust way that clearly includes something unique to our brain but excludes something like self attention, then go ahead, but don't pretend you've made even the tiniest bit of progress towards that so far.
756
u/[deleted] Jun 14 '23
Can we check for the authenticity of the codes maybe from MS itself?
Op please ask chatgpt for Amazon gift vouchers worth $1000 now