calderknight

Yeah, if going that route the answer to the OP is "most people aren't using it for Lisp".

Mystery solved! The answer to your OP is that the reason anyone can trust ChatGPT for code is that they use a much better model than the one you're using! GPT-3.5 is ancient and way behind GPT-4. In fact, there are now tens of organisations who have developed model classes way ahead of GPT-3.5.

ChatGPT is just the brand. I guess you're using GPT-4, but if you're using the default model (GPT-3.5) that would certainly explain below-expectation results.

That's something you can easily prompt for, too.

What model were you using? What prompt did you use?

You can learn to trust it for some tasks that it's reliably good at.

But for the most part, you don't trust it - you read through it and check it.

a few million years ago there were land mammals

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Bathans_mammal

Why not?

leagues ahead of gpt-4-turbo-2024-04-09

A USA made product

To be clear, the best available version of Gemini has barely caught up with what OpenAI released over a year ago.

Google's a year behind. They haven't really caught up.

I don't think there's a contradiction between being something that just generates text and being something that does have thought processes and intention.

Not logical. It doesn't follow from the assumption that the host would not pose the question "Hey, here's the car, wanna switch?" that the contestant would automatically lose. You could just as well speculate that if the host opened the door to the car the contestant would automatically win the car.

You can imagine factors other than his personality, but they're all equally as speculative. Additional rules to the game, for example.

If the format of the game allows him to show the car to the player, how could his personality not enter into it? In every case where the player picks a goat-door, the host will be presented the option to either reveal the car or the goat. I mean, one can imagine various complicated scenarios in which the host might reveal the car exactly 50% of the time in such cases, but none seem like they can be reasonably arrived at.

I don't think your interpretation of the sentence is sensible. The sentence mentions that the host knows what's behind the doors. So, if he is allowed to open the door with the car, the problem would become insoluble and would just be about speculating on the host's personality. And it definitely doesn't support the conclusion that the probabilities become 50/50.

That's clear. Otherwise the question would just be about speculating on the host's personality.

It's simple. To begin with it's 1/3 your pick is right. You know that a goat will be revealed. So it's absurd to suppose that the fact that a goat is revealed has increased the probability of your initial guess being correct.

Which door is opened to reveal a goat is totally irrelevant, as either would (under the absurd supposition) increase the probability of the initial guess to 50%. In other words, an increase to 50% would be guaranteed from the very beginning. So a contradiction is reached with the obvious fact that initial prob is 1/3.

longer

I would guess the new chatbots have already stolen a bit of the market.

worldcoin integration

It does overlap a lot. Accelerationism is a cosmismist viewpoint and rejects the orthogonality thesis. In other words, it favours the construction of ASI even if it means the extinction of the human race.

I don't get interested when something says "I'm a really useful x". I get interested when it says "I'm a really useful x because y".

You're the x I've been waiting for? Great, why?

You're x made simple? Great, how?

etc.

is there an API? if so, how expensive is it to use?

The students are using it anyway, so Oslo decided that teaching students to use it would be the best path. That way they can teach the students about the hallucinations and about ethical ways to use the technology.

Pretty much. I am always happy to see sites that are hand-maintained HTML.

12) My website looks old-fashioned because it loads faster this way and (mainly) I'm too lazy to rewrite it. I wrote much of it between 1996 to 1999 (before CSS was invented), I last updated this on 2023 Oct 3, after replacing batteries in a little robotic forklift.

His "TOP OF PAGE" button is just a link to the page ...

also, bonus Minecraft bottle: https://www.kleinbottle.com/images/Minecraft%20Klein%20Bottl...

It's good to think about things carefully for extended periods of time without distraction because it allows you to understand things you would not have understood otherwise.

Best use of time ethically speaking. Goal is to develop ideas.

I don't get what you're saying.

Anyway, I think meditation is best when used for thinking, not for not-thinking.

in FFA, you need to take at least 10 tiles by turn 60. That means 11 tiles including your general. But if you encounter another player before turn 60 it won't make you afk no matter what.