why does chatGPT passing tests or interviews continue to make headlines?
all they're proving is that tests, and interviews, are bullshit constructs that merely attempt to evaluate someone's ability to retain and regurgitate information
all they're proving is that tests, and interviews, are bullshit constructs that merely attempt to evaluate someone's ability to retain and regurgitate information
All people see is the cheating, and possibly this scary new AI that's going to get smarter than humans in a short period of time.
I suspect the best way to educate people on both the powers and limits of the technology is to get them to sit down for 15 minutes with it.
When you call it dumb, what do you mean? Can you give some examples?
Please don’t give computational examples we all already understand it does inference and doesn’t have floating point computational capabilities or reasoning, and so many give such examples for some silly reason.
I use it quite frequently too, mostly for solving coding problems, but at the end of the day it's just regurgitating information that it read online.
If we took an adversarial approach and deliberately tried to feed it false information, it would have no way of knowing what's bullshit and what's legit, in the way that a human could figure out.
A lot of people who've never used ChatGPT make the mistake of thinking it has symbolic reasoning like a human does, because its language output is human too.
All the time. Probably every single day I read something and say "that's clearly bullshit".
The problem with people is we keep pushing it to "Only AGI/machine superintelligence is good enough". We are getting models that behave closer to human level. The 'doesn't know everything, is good at somethings, and bullshits pretty well'. Yea, that's the average person. Instead we raise the bar and go 'well it needs to be a domain expert in all expert system' and that absolutely terrifies me that it will get to that stage before humanity is ready for it. This is not going to work well trying to deal with it after the fact.
Also, I think this is a bit overstated. Programmers (and smart people in general) like to think that their real job is high level system design or something, and that "mere regurgitation" is somehow the work of lesser craftsmen. When in reality what GPT shows is that high-dimensional regurgitation actually gets you a good fraction of the way down the road of understanding (or at least prediction). If there is a "buried lede" here it's that human intelligence is less impressive than we think.
No, all they are proving is that either tests are bullshit constructs, or ChatGPT is human-level.