Hacker News Reader

Comment by lukevp | Hacker News Reader

I see a lot of replies here talking about asking GPT questions in a domain an individual is an expert in, and being disappointed in the results. I think this is missing the point a bit. The impressive part of GPT isn’t that it’s an expert in anything, but that it’s better than an average human on many topics. For example - someone brought up GPT not comprehending homomorphic encryption fully. Well, I have a MS in CS and have been professionally developing software for 15 years, and I’ve even READ articles on homomorphic encryption multiple times, but I can’t articulate what it is very well. I just remember it’s inefficient and infeasible at this time.

The thing that is mind blowing to me is that I can talk with GPT about basically any topic and it can help get me in the right direction, I can talk with it to get clarity on anything that’s confusing, and it’s like a way to collaborate on thought without a human. That’s mindblowing to me!

View on HN

I describe GPT as really good at bridging contexts. As you point out, it does a great job pointing you in the right direction on pretty much any topic. I was using it with my 7 yo daughter and asked it to explain calculus in a way a 7 yo could understand and it did a pretty good job.

I agree. I use it in research to discover solutions or fields I wasn't even aware that exist

Once discovered, I can go search more conventionally for more reputable sources

GPT-4 has once solved a bug in an hour that took me a day.

It wasn't because it was a superintelligent entity, but because it was an intelligent scientific logbook.

It would break down possible root causes of the bug. I could add more if it misses any. It would give me the simplest possible solution to test each one. Sometimes it's not right and I have a simpler test.

But it'll track which ones we have tried so we don't go in circles with debugging. It's really a superior rubber duck + notepad.

Is there a way to reach you to talk about this further?

Sure, my email is in my profile.

If ChatGPT is impressive when discussing any subject, unless you’re an expert, it should be a journalist.

Okay, I know that sounds like a sleight but I mean it in reverse: we give it a hard time for failing at something humans can’t do either: be an expert at everything. Journalists do a great job despite regularly driving SMEs nuts.

I use it not for querying immutable truths but for exploring topics. It trivializes what used to be paralyzing for me: “where do I begin if I want to learn about X?”

Who is wiser? One who doesn't know much, but knows what he doesn't know and points this out when asked. Or the one who knows a lot, but doesn't know what he doesn't know, and (confidently) makes up something when he doesn't know? (also see Apology from Plato)

I'm not disappointed that GPT doesn't know the answers to questions in my domain of expertise. I'm disappointed that GPT doesn't know that it isn't an expert in my domain, and makes up a confident but wrong answers.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com