Previous poster said that GPT is to writing what calculators are to math. That's an interesting point, is this an analogy we can reason with?
My terse response was "no, because calculators are correct all the time whereas GPT is incorrect a lot of time". So, that reasoning can't be used. Need a different one.
So you're ignoring proof that calculators aren't correct all the time(infact given most numbers are irrational calculators are always mostly wrong and imprecise). And stating your incorrect view as fact.
That's what you mean by curious debate? Bizarre!
P.s. this is why it's a good analogy you've learnt something about calculators from thinking about the analogy as well as chatGPT
What was "curious debate" about your terse and wholly incorrect quip?
For the purposes of my education and socialisation to HN.
Previous poster said that GPT is to writing what calculators are to math. That's an interesting point, is this an analogy we can reason with?
My terse response was "no, because calculators are correct all the time whereas GPT is incorrect a lot of time". So, that reasoning can't be used. Need a different one.
So we conclude, no that's not a good analogy.
So you're ignoring proof that calculators aren't correct all the time(infact given most numbers are irrational calculators are always mostly wrong and imprecise). And stating your incorrect view as fact.
That's what you mean by curious debate? Bizarre!
P.s. this is why it's a good analogy you've learnt something about calculators from thinking about the analogy as well as chatGPT
2 replies →