• CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    9 days ago

    Correlation does not equal causation.

    You have to be a little off to WANT to interact with ChatGPT that much in the first place.

      • tias@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 days ago

        I use it many times a day for coding and solving technical issues. But I don’t recognize what the article talks about at all. There’s nothing affective about my conversations, other than the fact that using typical human expression (like “thank you”) seems to increase the chances of good responses. Which is not surprising since it matches the patterns that you want to evoke in the training data better.

        That said, yeah of course I become “addicted” to it and have a harder time coping without it, because it’s part of my workflow just like Google. How well would anybody be able to do things in tech or even life in general without a search engine? ChatGPT is just a refinement of that.

      • Croquette@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        I use it to generate a little function in a programming language I don’t know so that I can kickstart what I need to look for.

      • Cracks_InTheWalls@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 days ago

        There’s a few people I know who use it for boilerplate templates for certain documents, who then of course go through it with a fine toothed comb to add relevant context and fix obvious nonsense.

        I can only imagine there are others who aren’t as stringent with the output.

        Heck, my primary use for a bit was custom text adventure games, but ChatGPT has a few weaknesses in that department (very, very conflict adverse for beating up bad guys, etc.). There’s probably ways to prompt engineer around these limitations, but a) there’s other, better suited AI tools for this use case, b) text adventure was a prolific genre for a bit, and a huge chunk made by actual humans can be found here - ifdb.org, c) real, actual humans still make them (if a little artsier and moody than I’d like most of the time), so eventually I stopped.

        Did like the huge flexibility v. the parser available in most made by human text adventures, though.