Are you using GPT-4? If not, it's understandable.
If you don't pay for ChatGPT, you get GPT-3.5. You can also get access to GPT-4 if you use the playground.
If you don't pay for ChatGPT, you get GPT-3.5. You can also get access to GPT-4 if you use the playground.
I asked it (actual names changed):
"I run the Linux command line program "foo". When I use the flags -xyz, I get results, but when I use -txyz I get nothing. What could this mean?"
And it told me: "The lack of results is because you didn't use the -t flag".
Or I ask it some very basic music theory questions and it gets stuff wrong all the time, giving impossible answers.
Do you have API access? the old model there still gives me very good results.
I'd kill to have an easy, wont-get-me-banned-way to submit a query to both the UI and API at the same time and show the results in, say, meld or so.
When there's one definitive answer to something that people keep repeating there's a slight chance that it's actually true. Shocking, I know.
But hey, if you are really looking to convince yourself of something, I have no doubt that it can be done.
I keep going around telling people that 1+1=3, why do they always give me the same nonsense about the number '2'?
I blame Sam Altman.
2. Obnoxious? This is my opinion, I don't get what Sam Altman or 1+1=3 is supposed to mean in this context.
We do a lot of experiments involving gpt3.5, 4, claude-v2, titan-large, and palm2, and for what it's worth, on our real production workloads gpt4 shines. We can make Palm2 produce decent results with a lot of extra effort, and claude-v2 is passable but gpt4 does not disappoint. This is low-grade knowledge management stuff, and we are not using it as a information-retrieval system - but for basic 'cognitive' tasks where all the information needed is provided in the prompt. I'd not rely on it for info retrieval tasks such as the examples quoted above - its knowledge base is highly compressed, after all.