Comment on Ask ChatGPT to pick a number between 1 and 100

• FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  What you’ve described would be like looking at a chart of various fluid boiling points at atmospheric pressure and being like “Wow, water boils at 100 C!” It would only be interesting if that somehow weren’t the case.

  source

  • jarfil@beehaw.org ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Where is the “Wow!” in this post? It states a fact, like “Water boils at 100C under 1 atm”, and shows that the student (ChatGPT) has correctly reproduced the experiment.

    Why do you think schools keep teaching that “Water boils at 100C under 1 atm”? If it’s so obvious, should they stop putting it on the test and failing those who say it boils at “69C, giggity”?

    source

    • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Derek feeling the need to comment that the bias in the training data correlates with the bias of the corrected output of a commercial product just seemed really bizarre to me. Maybe it’s got the same appeal as a zoo or something, I never really got into watching animals be animals in a zoo.

      source

      • jarfil@beehaw.org ⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Hm? Watching animals be animals at a zoo, is a way better sampling of how animals are animals, than for example watching that wildlife “documentary” where they’d throw lemmings of a cliff “for dramatic effect” (a “commercially corrected bias”?).

        In this case, the “corrected output” is just 42, not 37, but as the temperature increases on the Y axis, we get a glimpse of internal biases, which actually let through other patterns of the training data, like the 37.

        source