Hacker News Reader

Comment by eachro | Hacker News Reader

No. This is a paradigm changing technology - the kind that happens once every 10 years or so. ChatGPT is going to change the entire landscape of knowledge work over the next few years and I'd rather be up to date with the advances even if it does mean I'll have to click the "More" button at the bottom of the page to see non-ChatGPT HN posts.

View on HN

Strongly disagree. I think its fame will die out once people will get tired of reading articles written by soulless machine or being tricked into something that turned out to be GPT-made. That's why even tho Picasso paintings are awesome, 99.9% of population does not have a printout of Mona Lisa hanging on their wall.

There has never been technology that blew up like "chatGPT" before that made a real impact on society. That's why my take is its all a scam. Youtube "chatGPT" you will see how everyone and their dog are making $50,000 a month passive income using GPT. Of course they will tell you all their secrets... as long as you watch commercials attached to their videos.

Picasso didn’t paint the Mona Lisa… did you fact check w chatgpt

Are you debating that ChatGPT allows things that previously were impossible or whether these things are useful?

Incredibly short sighted perspective.

Chatgpt-backed tools will become the norm in the same way that every knowledge worker uses Google on a daily basis today. Note that I did not say that people will use it to replace search - search is but a small bit of how it can be used.

I can see it helping with troubleshooting and quickly getting some code example, documentation or whatever without googling, if I didn't have to wait a minute for each answer. But calling that a paradigm shift is quite an exaggeration. The only thing ChatGPT is really reliable at is correct use of language. Everything else is fancy Lorem Ipsum to show off those capabilities. The answers make sense a lot of the time but the quality is simply too inconsistent for me to have a use for it.

On one hand those are huge advancements but at the same time just another kind of software that doesn't work properly when I need it to.

As an example: grammarly is a company that makes money off getting users to "correct use of language". They make millions per year and this is just one use case of ChatGPT. Other use cases: copilot , AI personal assistant/scheduler, research summarizer (ex: Ought). Each of these is a multi million dollar business at worst.

Let's not forget that this is iteration 1 of the technology. It is only going to get better and better. The fact that it can already do all these independent tasks without having seen additional data for the task is a complete game changer.

I wouldn't call copilot a business until there's reasonable certainty that use of it can't get you sued. This is a topic right now in courts and the question isn't even if Microsoft and others have violated countless copyrights - they have - but whether they can get through with it.

> The fact that it can already do all these independent tasks without having seen additional data for the task is a complete game changer

There are some impressive examples, yes, but ironically they aren't among the ones getting hyped. Right now AI is only usable for one kind of application: where a few incorrect results don't matter at all. That means for me projects like Copilot are out - if I want buggy code I can just write it myself, and at least I understand my own code. ChatGPT quickly falls apart when you actually start testing it for something productive. I don't doubt others have some limited uses for it.

Found the chatbot

well, the soulless articles really aren't the use-case I'm interested in and the release of chatGPT already changed the way I work as software engineer. So, not all scam. I hope to have a tool like this still at hand in the future.

I hope you're joking.

GPT-3 has been available for more than a year and there has been no large scale impact at all.

The few AI generated articles are easy to spot and full of mistakes.

ChatGPT is great at one thing: rambling.

I disagree there has been no large scale impact. We're starting to see it roll out, and there is a ton of potential here.

Msft literally just rolled out Teams premium. That's not nothing IMO. We're seeing it start to get integrated in actual products.

Hype isn't impact or potential.

Microsoft is jumping on the hype train to make a quick buck out of a cheap API, why shouldn't they? That doesn't mean it actually brings any value.

It's exactly the same as every video game company trying to shoe-horn NFTs into their games.

As a side note, it doesn't look like Microsoft is using GPT for its Teams premium, it's mostly about voice recognition and things like that than content generation...

Remember when Microsoft, IBM and Facebook jumped on the blockchain bandwagon?

Not attacking you personally, but if there's anything around ChatGPT I'm tired of it's these kinds of dismissive comments. "Oh, this is not new at all, in fact it's merely a trivial language model, and similar to other text generation software!" posts the contrarian! And the goal post moving: "Sure, it can now do A, B, and C, but ChatGPT is not perfect and can't do X, Y, and Z, so obviously it's overhyped and not even slightly amazing!"

The output of this software would have been considered absolutely incredible to most of the Computer Science field 10 years ago, and would have been considered sorcery 20 years ago.

Yes, if you're one of the 0.003% of the world who are AI researchers, ChatGPT is probably somewhere on the spectrum between boring and kinda-impressive. To the rest of us, it's astounding.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com