|
|
|
|
|
|
by resource0x
1207 days ago
|
|
|
This indeed often works, but there's a whole class of questions where it doesn't. Example: yesterday, I was listening to Abbey Lincoln's performance of the song "Angel Face" (you can find it on youtube). I wondered who composed such a beautiful song. Unlike the majority of jazz standards, this song doesn't have a dedicated page in wikipedia. Other sites cited different composers. When I asked chatGPT, it confidently told me the song was composed by Duke Jordan in 1952.
This claim was easy to refute by googling Duke Jordan. By more googling, discovered the real composer: Hank Jones (1947, originally as an instrumental piece). This is an instance representing the class of questions where you expect a very concrete answer, but chatGPT fails, and the info it provides is totally useless. |
|
|
On the other hand it seems better at more abstract questions, as well as giving interesting background around some of the “why?” ones.
The coding ones I would limit to very short tasks that are easy to eyeball and verify: on one hand, the other day in 5-6 iterations it wrote me a functional prototype of an audio player (because I was bored to try to piece together the complexity that is WebAudio api); on the other hand once I tried to ask it to write a file upload code for a Rust web server ride - and it came up with three plausibly looking but totally invented frameworks :-)
So, I won’t let it do anything in an unsupervised fashion.