I really wonder if this sort of thing is the how AI will work.
We tell AI what we want. AI produces a hyper-specific, but barely comprehensible result. We look over the result to make sure it’s all good.
Then execute.
We tell AI what we want. AI produces a hyper-specific, but barely comprehensible result. We look over the result to make sure it’s all good.
Then execute.
Except... it made ONE ERROR that I just spent two hours tracking down and fixing in my JSON file and now in the Stripe dash. (I coincidentally found the error using ChatGPT lol).
It's probably still faster and less error-prone than I could have done it manually. But it's still error-prone...
It only "knows" what it writes down and if you force it to print the intermediate step it can more accurately get to the final answer.
These models do not "think". This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how they work. It's not AI. It's not even language. It's just text inference.
I would suggest that a person saying "ask the model to think about" in this context in no way implies that that person is confused about the nature of the model, it is simply a convenient piece of language that helps us to achieve the desired result.
Yes, it does. Assuming GPT "thinks" is shaping public perception and that's already gone much too far.
It looks you just pattern-matched on the word _think_ and replied with a pre-made opinion about how AIs can't think. Ironic...
So it's still fair to say you can ask it to think