mc2fool wrote:ReformedCharacter wrote:I think some who have criticised the ChatGPT have slightly missed the point, factual errors and omissions can be corrected by more\better data. IMHO it is the linguistic skills and 'comprehension' that are impressive.
Only if it "understands" that data. A lot of the issues have not been about factual errors and omissions per se but of self contradiction and of pure invention.
It seems to perform like a student who is desperate to demonstrate ability and fears to say I don't know and instead says what comes into its mind and having got it wrong, desperately tries to defend the position, digging an ever deeper hole with every sentence.
In this interpretation one could argue that the ai has an ego and wants to appear smart not having done all the homework and recommended reading, perhaps in this case because mentors at openai have deliberately restricted what it could peruse.
All in all it displays many human characteristics that one meets in education. it does not have the binary logic position of computer.
One imagines that the next and subsequent iterations will improve exponentially and that it is just a matter of time before it can out perform any human at any intellectual task.
Regards,