Hacker News Reader

Comment by sixtram | Hacker News Reader

I've posted this into another thread as well, from Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, two months ago, on his Twitter feed:

"ChatGPT is incredibly limited, but good enough at some things to create a misleading impression of greatness. it's a mistake to be relying on it for anything important right now. [...] fun creative inspiration; great! reliance for factual queries; not such a good idea." (Sam Altman)

View on HN

But in interviews about the Bing partnership, Sam has been saying that while ChatGPT was a bad tech demo, Bing Chat is using a better model with way better features that everyone should be using. He's been talking about how great it is that it cites its references, integrates the latest data, etc. I'm specifically thinking of the New York Times' Hard Fork podcast he was on (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/10/podcasts/bings-revenge-an...), but I suspect he's been saying the same things to everyone. He's been marketing Bing Chat as a significant improvement ready for mass usage, when it really seems like it's basically just ChatGPT with search results auto-included in the prompt.

wonder what he has to say about the humanlike responses here

https://www.reddit.com/r/bing/comments/110eagl/the_customer_...

I would rather an AI chat not act human

Wow.... we've created artificial cognitive dissonance!

This made me laugh in disbelief. A quick search shows enough posts of a similar nature that if this isn't true it's either a really determined prankster with lots of accounts or playing along with this has become a trend.

Up until ChatGPT became all the rage, Sam has been pushing a crypto scam called Worldcoin, which aims to scan everyone’s eyeballs(??) and somehow pay everyone in the world a living wage(???) without creating any value. This while allegedly exploiting people from 3rd world countries.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/04/06/1048981/worldcoi...

So, as much as I am impressed by the tech of ChatGPT, I don’t consider him to be a very credible person.

Apparently it’s still a thing:

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/currencies/chatgpt-...

Tangentially related, but Hard Fork is my new favorite podcast. The flow, the humor, the interviews, and the tidbits of information the two hosts share and discuss make for such a great listening experience. These guys (Kevin Roose and Casey Newton) are pros, and it shows.

ChatGPT as a system involves an unreliable LLM chatbot and a series of corrections efficient enough to give the impression of reliability for many fields and these together feel like the future - enough to get a "code red" from Google.

It's worth remembering that back in the day, Google succeed not by exact indexing but by having the highest quality results for each term - and they used existing resources as well as human workers to get these (along with pagerank).

What you have is a hybrid system and one whose filter is continuously updated. But it's a very complicated machine and going from something seemingly working to something satisfying the multitude of purposes modern search satisfies is going to be huge and hugely expensive project.

https://gizmodo.com/openai-chatgpt-ai-chat-bot-1850001021

This feels deeply ironic and cynical that MSFT touts putting ChatGPT everywhere, in essentially the business document platform, are users going to be asking about company facts and getting hallucinations and putting those hallucinations into business documents that compounds ChatGPT's ability to hallucinate?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com