Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

nick1706 t1_j68fdov wrote

I’ll take clickbait for $1000 Alex.

517

Hulemann t1_j68oc23 wrote

“I'm sorry, I'm not Alex. I am a language model created by OpenAI. Is there something specific you would like to know or discuss?”

That’s what ChatGPT had to say.

74

davvblack t1_j68t03b wrote

i got an answer that's both better and worse. I like the disclaimer being like "i'm not going to make you 800 different answers", but then in the actual answer it understood that the interval is 200:

> I'm sorry, I'm unable to create that many Jeopardy questions in the category "clickbait" for you as it goes beyond my capabilities. However, I can give you a few examples of Jeopardy questions in the category "clickbait":

> $200: This type of headline is designed to make readers want to click on a link to find out more.

> $400: This type of headline is used to make readers believe that something exciting or important has happened.

> $600: This type of headline is used to make readers believe that they will learn something new or valuable by clicking on a link.

> $800: This type of headline is used to create a sense of urgency or scarcity in order to encourage readers to click on a link.

> $1000: This term is used to describe the practice of creating misleading or sensational headlines in order to get more clicks on a link.

12

TheBeardofGilgamesh t1_j695i4k wrote

$200: “this headline is designed to piss you off for click through ad revenue”

6

Neil_Live-strong t1_j6dgbed wrote

That’s just different definitions of clickbait. Stupid and I doubt there’s any rhyme or reason as to why one is worth $200 and another $800.

1

ShrimpCrackers t1_j68te80 wrote

It's also hilarious because ChatGPT is just the dumbed down version of OpenAI's text-davinci-003 and no options which has been available for over a year now. https://beta.openai.com/playground

It's actually superior.

19

shableep t1_j6akcpi wrote

Please explain how it's superior. I'm trying to use it for writing code and so far it's under performing significantly when compared to ChatGPT. Also I heard that ChatGPT uses something closer to GPT 3.5.

10

StickiStickman t1_j6dddc1 wrote

Well that's a really stupid fucking lie.

It's better in every single way than GPT-3.

Why are you just making shit up?

0

ShrimpCrackers t1_j6dm6ne wrote

What the fuck are you talking about, they're BOTH based on GPT-3 and they're both from OpenAI.

ChatGPT is basically just a modified, user-friendly version of text-davinci-003 in the playground. But it takes nothing to learn how to use the playground and its literally better because you can at least fine tune your responses and it even has voice inputs.

1

StickiStickman t1_j6eybii wrote

Stop spreading lies. ChatGPT is different just from the architecture and training set alone.

−1

ShrimpCrackers t1_j6h2fx9 wrote

https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenAI/comments/zdrnsf/comment/iz3kfui/?context=3

It's not that different. They're tuned differently but pretty much everyone using both will agree that Davinci is better although harder to use versus ChatGPT but not by much. Takes minutes to learn.

1

StickiStickman t1_j6idpr2 wrote

If you want to keep living in your own world, go ahead. Literally no one except you thinks that, especially anyone in the professional ML space like me.

0

T1Pimp t1_j68royi wrote

It IS business insider after all.

12

valvilis t1_j68rofq wrote

Plot twist: it is a ChatGPT-generated headline.

5