AI 2023. Meet ChatGPT. - page 166

New comment
 
Do I have to pay for it with openai? Or chatgpt plus?
 
Алексей K. #:
Do I have to pay for it with openai? Or chatgpt plus?
To the developers of this feature. I don't know exactly who they are, but I don't think it's OpenAI. Check it out on github.

If you manage to connect, write here about your impressions of working with this tool.
 
I wonder if ChatGPT can find semantic analogues for whole books? For example, to find a book similar in meaning? Let's say there is some book, let it be for example a popular science bestseller "Sapiens: A Brief History of Mankind". Can this AI find an analogue of this book, let's say by a Russian-speaking author?
 

errors

here's a question for you.)

 
A few logical exercises on the theory of the Universe as a computer simulation:

1. A priori, the existence of a simulation means the existence of a simulator, because every virtual process hides a real process underneath. But, the question is: can a simulation be a simulation? - yes, but in this case, it must also have a simulation. And so on without end. No matter how much we question our reality, asking "is it simulated?", we will eventually come to the conclusion that, at some level, there is an absolute, unsimulated simulation waiting for us. And it is REAL.

2. The first point logically proves that going back through the layers of simulation, we will inevitably arrive at the original reality where it all begins. This means that simulation theory does not deny the existence of reality, it only asserts that it is OUR reality that is the simulation.

3- Due to the impossibility of confirming or disproving the conclusion of the second point, we will temporarily accept it. Suppose our reality is a simulation. In that case, there are no real mysteries in our reality. All the riddles of the simulation are fake. Therefore, there is no point in looking for answers to them. Moreover, if EVERYTHING is fake, then we truly know NOTHING.

4- Based on the conclusion of the third point, our cognition should be directed towards finding the real reality and solving its riddles. This means we should ignore all intermediate layers of simulation and strive to find a way out of the virtual "prison".

5. Remembering that we ourselves are a simulation, our "exit" from the virtual prison will also be virtual. It means that we cannot leave it in principle, with any endeavours, efforts and aspirations. Thus, the only solution for us is to accept our reality as real, and then all the mysteries of the World will also become real, and our cognition will find meaning and purpose.

6. Based on the above reasoning, it is better to affirm our reality as real a priori, because otherwise, any knowledge we have gained about the world is a fake, and we are left with nothing.
 
Реter Konow #:

6. Based on the above reasoning, it is better to assert our reality is real a priori, because otherwise, any knowledge we have gained about the world is a fake, and we are left with nothing.

Whether we live in a simulation or not is irrelevant, our knowledge of this world we live in, and therefore is no longer a fake for us.

In addition, the assumption that we live in a simulation gives an advantage over the assumption that we live in the real world, because in a simulation bugs and all sorts of glitches are more likely to occur, which can be used for practical purposes if they are discovered. even a targeted search for clues is possible. thus, the worldview that we live in the real world does not give any advantage, because for us it does not matter where we live, what matters is how we can benefit from it.

If we live in a simulation, then almost all unidentified unexplained phenomena can be easily explained and practically useful chains of logic can be constructed. if it is the real world, then the very fact of this statement makes it impossible to construct interesting theories.

axiom -> theory -> proof. at the axiom stage the foundations for theories are laid.

so which world is more real for us, the one that is more understandable and explainable, or the one that is not understandable and has a lot of unexplainable phenomena?))))))
 
Lilita Bogachkova #:

ChatGPT is not the only AI, in my opinion there are better ones that justify their text with links to the original source. And I don't mean Bing.

Can you be more specific about which ones are better?

 
Andrey Dik #:

whether we live in a simulation or not is irrelevant, our knowledge of this world we live in and therefore no longer a fake to us.

In addition, the assumption that we live in a simulation gives an advantage over the assumption that we live in the real world, because in a simulation bugs and all sorts of glitches are more likely to occur, which can be used for practical purposes if they are discovered. even a targeted search for clues is possible. thus, the worldview that we live in the real world does not give any advantage, because for us it does not matter where we live, what matters is how we can benefit from it.

If we live in a simulation, then almost all unidentified unexplained phenomena can be easily explained and practically useful chains of logic can be constructed. if this is the real world, then the very fact of this statement prevents us from constructing interesting theories.

axiom -> theory -> proof. at the axiom stage the foundations for theories are laid.

so which world is more real for us, the one that is more understandable and explainable, or the one that is not understandable and has many unexplainable phenomena?))))))

Nonsense. It matters if you live your life or if you live a lie.

 
Without a neural interface, chatgpt is ugly. Not only does it answer almost always incorrectly to complex topical questions, but you have to write and maintain a dialogue. Google is faster.
1...159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173...216
New comment