Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

elijahmeeks OP t1_jag2y5a wrote

Reply to comment by aluvus in [OC] Complexity and Uncertainty of Topics that ChatGPT Claims to be Difficult to Discuss by elijahmeeks

A lot of very confident points that you've posted, you'd do well as an online AI.

  1. ChatGPT is most definitely a data source now and (along with similar such tools) will be used as such more and more going forward, so it's good to examine how it approaches making data. Whether it "should" be able to assign meaningful numerical scores to things like this, it sure was willing to.
  2. Agree and it's even more concerning how it does it with data. Take a look at the end of the notebook and you'll see at the end how it hallucinates with the data it gives me. Again, people are going to use these tools like this, so we should be aware of how it responds.
  3. I think it's revealing not just of the biases of the corpora and creators, but also of the controls to avoid controversy that makes it evaluate certain topics as more "uncertain".
  4. Good point. I struggle with the way this subreddit is designed to showcase a single chart since so many of my charts are part of larger apps or documents.
0

aluvus t1_jag4p3r wrote

The fact that people misuse it as a data source is not an excuse for you to knowingly misuse it, doubly so without providing any context to indicate that you know the data is basically bunk. This is fundamentally irresponsible behavior. Consider how your graphic will be interpreted by different audiences:

  • People who do not know how ChatGPT works (most people): wow, the AI can figure out how complex a topic is and how certain it should be about it! These are definitely real capabilities, and not an illusion. Thank you for reinforcing my belief that it is near-human intelligence!
  • People who do know how ChatGPT works: these numbers are essentially meaningless, this graphic will only serve to mislead people

> Whether it "should" be able to assign meaningful numerical scores to things like this, it sure was willing to.

Yes, so will random.org. Should I make a graphic of that too? Perhaps I could imply that it is sentient.

9