Shhhh they can hear you, don't give them ideas

>Eventually when the supply is high enough, most people’s work will be worth little to nothing.

Which will bring down most professional writers with it.

The same thing happened in big cities with professional musicians: so many amateurs want to play in front of an audience so badly they'll pay establishments to play, killing paid gigs for the pros.

There are many millions of people who need a new friend more than any other utility. The more convincing these get - and they're getting there - the less that those people will care that their new friend isn't flesh and blood.

I've been using it for the last month, especially on those days that ChatGPT is down.

Apparently it's based on GPT3 rather than ChatGPT's 3.5, but it's still very usable. It isn't quite as good as ChatGPT at refining an idea through back-and-forth chat but I like it more than the Openai Playground.

Added bonus - very few restrictions, and it's pretty hard to get it to moralize at you.

The same is true for OpenAI's 20 dollar premium plan. If a small startup like you.com can make a working service, It won't be long for every major internet company from Naver to Yandex to Amazon to even freaking Yahoo to roll out their own, for free.

This 20 dollar premium access is temporary.

You.com was being flogged around here in some posts a few weeks ago, giving the impression that it's some junk site riding off of ChatGPT's popularity. It's not junk.

In those moments when ChatGPT is oversubscribed, you.com makes a good replacement. Added bonus: it doesn't do the church lady lecture if you ask it something ChatGPT would consider naughty.

>ChatGPT can translate, summarize, paraphrase, program, write poetry, conduct therapy, debate, plan, create, and speculate. Any system that can do all of these things can reasonably be said to be a step on the path to general intelligence.

And this is what makes it different from the naysayers who claim it's a glorified autocorrect. It obviously has its flaws and limitations, but this is the VIC-20 version and already it's massively disruptive.

The goofy name ChatGPT sounds like a 20 year old instant messenger client like ICQ. The name hides that it's a serious, history-altering development, as does the media coverage that fixates on plagiarized essays.

When you watch a Pixar movie you're watching a product of people typing something into a machine. Software did much of the rest.

You'd have trouble convincing people that Pixar movies aren't "art" because software made those textures and objects rather than a human with a brush.

This moral panic about ChatGPT cheating is pointless. The teachers who are freaking out think that their job is to teach students to write essays, but it never was. Their job is to teach students to effectively express themselves in writing. Very few people write essays for a living, but lots of people write emails or letters.

If ChatGPT helps them do that - like Grammarly on steroids - what's the problem? It just means the "I teach essays" teacher needs to modify their ancient lesson plans.

And I say this as a teacher currently marking a stack of essays.

Reality has a known anti-Israeli bias.