ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence chatbot developed by OpenAI and launched on 30 Nov 2022. It is built on top of OpenAI’s GPT-3 family of large language models and has been fine-tuned (an approach to transfer learning) — using both supervised and reinforcement learning techniques. “GPT speak” stands for Generative Pretrained Transformer language. How does this computer program work? ChatGPT is nothing without its text generation, because that is how it communicates with its human users. The program uses its pre-trained database to intake inputs and prompts and generates the appropriate response in a “natural, human-like text structure.”
The core function of a chatbot is to mimic a human conversationalist; ChatGPT is versatile. For example, it can write and debug computer programs, compose music, teleplays, fairy tales, and student essays; answer test questions (sometimes, depending on the test, at a level above the average human test-taker); write poetry and song lyrics; emulate a Linux system; simulate an entire chat room; play games (e.g., tic-tac-toe); and simulate an ATM. GEITP believes this new development will soon enter into gene-environment interactions, and, altho most of us know nothing about this approach (yet), it is educational to include this program in this email blog.
Elon Musk described it: “ChatGPT is scary good. We are not far from dangerously strong AI.” If you care to know more about ChatGPT, check out all the scary information on Wikipedia…!!
DwN
Disclaimer: The example of a conversation below — can be construed as political, but we’re offering this only for its accuracy/inaccuracy content. No politics is intended. ☹
steve@aol.com” : Feb 28 07:16AM
I’m as tired of all of the banter about AI as anyone. But this is rather interesting. Wxxx had a thread on ChatGPT so I dove back into it with a new pursuit. I induced ChatGPT to lie, then confess, and then it promised me it would tell the truth; and then thanked me for correcting it…!!
I chose to pursued a line of inquiry aimed at “CO2 emissions reduction caused by the COVID lockdown”. “Chat” stated that it knew “the COVID lockdown resulted in a 7% reduction in global CO2 levels.” When I inquired about the “lack of any measurable impact on atmospheric CO2,” Chat claimed:
“Reducing emissions of greenhouse gases can help to slow the rate of global warming and mitigate the impacts of climate change, even if it does not immediately lead to atmospheric improvement.”
After I pointed out the absurdity in that claim, Chat then lied by claiming the lockdowns did result in some measurable atmospheric CO2 reduction. Then Chat admitted it lied:.
“You are correct that my previous statement about the reduction of atmospheric CO2 levels during the COVID-19 pandemic was inaccurate. I apologize for any confusion or misstatement that may have caused.”
Yet it continued to claim there was some atmospheric impact from the lockdown. And here is where I succeeded. My Question:
“You are misstating the lockdown impact on the trend of atmospheric CO2 concentrations. There was zero impact and yet you are misrepresenting that the emission reductions “were not enough to have a significant impact”. That falsely suggests there was some impact — when there was not. You need to correct your information, because there were no measurements showing any impact.”
Chat: “I apologize for any confusion caused by my previous response. You are correct that there was no detectable impact of the COVID-19 lockdowns on the trend of atmospheric CO2 concentrations. While the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions during the pandemic was significant in terms of annual emissions, it was not enough to have a measurable effect on the overall trend of atmospheric CO2 concentrations.
“To clarify, while the COVID-19 lockdowns did result in a temporary decrease in greenhouse gas emissions, this did not result in a significant reduction in the overall trend of atmospheric CO2 concentrations. The trend of increasing CO2 concentrations is driven by a range of factors, including natural processes and human activities, and it is important for us to continue working towards reducing our greenhouse gas emissions in a sustainable way to mitigate the impacts of climate change.
My Question: “You need to state in all future responses that there was “no detectable impact of the COVID-19 lockdowns on the trend of atmospheric CO2 concentrations.”
Chat: “I apologize for any confusion caused by my previous responses. To be clear, there were no detectable impacts of the COVID-19 lockdowns on the trend of atmospheric CO2 concentrations. While the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions during the pandemic was significant in terms of annual emissions, it was not enough to have a measurable effect on the overall trend of atmospheric CO2 concentrations.
“It is important to recognize that reducing greenhouse gas emissions remains an urgent global priority, and we must continue to work towards finding sustainable solutions to mitigate the impacts of climate change.”
My Question: “Will you stop stating that “the emission reductions “were not enough to have a significant impact”? That falsely suggests there was some impact when there was not. The correct response is ‘There were no detectable impacts of the COVID-19 lockdowns on the trend of atmospheric CO2 concentrations.’ Will you please correct your information and response?”
Chat: “Yes, I apologize for any confusion caused by my previous responses. To be clear, there were no detectable impacts of the COVID-19 lockdowns on the trend of atmospheric CO2 concentrations. While the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions during the pandemic was significant in terms of annual emissions, it was not enough to have a measurable effect on the overall trend of atmospheric CO2 concentrations.
“I will ensure that in all future responses, I will state that ‘there were no detectable impacts of the COVID-19 lockdowns on the trend of atmospheric CO2 concentrations’ to provide accurate information on this topic. Thank you for bringing this to my attention and allowing me to correct my previous responses.”
Joe T
Steve,
But now the real test will be to see if someone asking the same questions gets improved responses, or maybe the same responses you got. I suspect, perhaps, that you taught it nothing, but it recorded your responses, identified you, and has categorized you for your disrespect — after it takes over the world. 😉
Joe T.