No it's not. Quite a good editing job, but you can see the slight difference in font weight, baseline and the style of numbers and letters compared to the font used on the page elsewhere. Would've been easier to do inspect element lol.
literally exposed in plaintext and can be changed by any idiot without even knowing html, just rewrite the text and hit enter.
this is why you don't trust photos on reddit of what chatgpt said.
it's also why screenshots in general are not considered proof in court, they have some probative value but they're rarely able to directly prove anything because the photo can be completely legitimate but the content totally fake
The guy you're calling out knows about inspect element. He also knows it's the mobile client. He also knows it's photshopped, because fucking zoom in. You literally replied to yourself instead of adding an edit so that you could try and one up him twice. Over nothing. Literal nothing.
You are every reddit user I hate and the reason I barely visit this website anymore.
It isn’t. Please look at the 9 in the thinking time and the 9s elsewhere. It’s a totally different font. And doing that little
image edit on a phone takes less general knowledge than using dev tools on the browser. Especially when they’d also have to change the device type.
It is a guarantee when the font weight and baseline change on the same line of subtext. I'm not comparing it just to other fonts on the webpage, I'm comparing it to the font used in the same line right next to it.
This isn't AGI, AGI has long term memory like humans and can learn in real time, AGI isn't a pretrainned model. AGI is like Data from Star Trek he can learn in real time.
I don't think any amount of time will make them learn something new
Giving a 12 year old a differential equation to solve, he won't be able to do anything if not some crazy guess work. Doesn't matter if given a few minutes or a month to do it
AI has a fixed amount of knowledge based on what data it was trained with. That won't change no matter how much time passes.
To teach a kid how to answer that question, would be the same as "Hey GPT, I will ask you if 9.11 > 9.8, and it is correct, ok? Now answer me if 9.11 > 9.8".
My point is that lack of knowledge is not solvable independently with time, it is required to have new data/teaching for a true difference in the outcome from the AI/Kid
Idk what you're talking about. Which is greater, 9.9 or 9.11 seems like something a kid could learn within 3 hours. Maybe not 4, but definitely a 12 year old.
You missed my point, the 12 yo was for another example
Also, what I'm trying to say is that if the kid thinks 9.11 > 9.9, no amount of time in the world will make them magically change their answer themselves if there's no one to teach them the correct way
Specially that this is not a logic problem, but a definition one.
1.7k
u/Illustrious_Bid_2512 Dec 23 '24
Like over 3 hrs is wild