Hursty Businesses and institutions will have to jump in or be left behind

Completely agree. I had ChatGPT take a cognitive ability test that I would have asked a job applicant to complete. Passed with flying colours. If a worker could use ChatGPT to do the tricky stuff in their job, then it’s the test that is no longer fit for purpose. Businesses urgently need to figure out how to leverage the technology, rather than misplaced attempts to ban its use.

    a month later

    Anyone know why ChatGPT sign-up is currently unavailable?

    I was going to use it to write a lengthy ‘Into the weeds’ Hugo rebuttal of my claim about kebabs and omelettes in the food thread.

      Elon probably had it closed down because he’s worried about AI. The fucking wanker.

      Hursty Yes, but I can set my VPN server to almost anywhere and that is usually the first thing I try.

          Do you follow Brian Roemmele, Hursty? If not give him a look, what he posts daily is very interesting in terms of the development. Its equal parts amazing and terrifying.

            LT42 I’ll check him out, cheers for the tip

              It this ever gets to the point where it can realistically match my level of message board BANTS then I will be astonished.

                mono-stereo
                Now that would be dangerous.

                Would probably have to regress it back to Smallman1.0, essentially the same bantzzz as the robot in Short Circuit

                    Hursty What a time to be alive, who do you believe, the human or AI?

                    If Mr Hood was spouting nonsense then it wouldn’t take long for his claim that he wasn’t actually jailed to be rubbished and he would have zero grounds to sue.

                    Given what ChatGPT said seems to indeed to be slanderous, the question should rather be whether AI can be sued or not?

                    Its fairly random and not uncommon propensity to lack accuracy is certainly of concern. No doubt there are already plenty of thickets out there accepting its answers uncritically in their entirety.

                    A newspaper publishing the same kind of thing would certainly be liable for being sued.

                    If he’s successful it could really open the floodgates and potentially suddenly turn the whole thing from a potential asset to a massive liability for its owners.

                        hugopal I’m fairly certain the current laws don’t account for the ability to sue AI itself?

                        It would be funny to see how well it defended itself given the chance, regardless of its inaccuracies it is supremely powerful in many respects

                            Mad_Cyril Would probably have to regress it back to Smallman1.0, essentially the same bantzzz as the robot in Short Circuit

                            I asked ChatGPT if Ed is at the bants top-table and it replied “Yes”!?!

                            Clearly the whole thing is deeply flawed and has a fondness for a small pool of repetitive, pre-programmed answers.

                            • LT42 replied to this.

                                Hursty hugopal I’m fairly certain the current laws don’t account for the ability to sue AI itself?

                                I didn’t mean it in the sense of the literal AI, but as in whether the creator, OpenAI, can be sued on the basis of being a publisher.