.
>an obvious counterexample ChatGPT uses sub-word tokens. This is not a surprising outcome.
On the contrary. My example is to show that ChatGPT does fairly well with constrained questions and textual forms, and gets worse with broader questions. "What's new with you" is a relatively common greeting.
>stuff nobody said >Given that the names were made-up and unique, and have zero hits on google You said it yourself. I just don't see the novelty that a machine learning algorithm, trained on huge amounts of stuff…
I've tried this out. It doesn't seem to matter how you phrase your request for "alternative music notation", it suggests colouring it in. Which is very easily found on a Wikipedia page describing an existing system used…
I'm baffled how people are so amazed by easily-found existing ideas being presented by an arrogant chatbot.
You're amazed because a training set, largely based on the contents of the internet since about 2011, is able to find words that rhyme with arbitrary word endings? 4 stanzas. My bad. Still not impressed.
The lionisation of GPT technology (which is nothing special, apart from the scale of execution) is quite embarrassing. Have we forgotten that each of us has, within our own heads, a computer vastly superior to this toy…
Your original comment made a big deal of a poem-writer being able to incorporate unique words that you gave to it in the first place. No, that's not very interesting. Writing a "4-line humourous poem" is also trivial.…
Given that you supplied ChatGPT with those names, which still have the very ordinary properties of rhyming with other words and denoting a particular person or being, that's not very interesting.
The string of developments that started with the phonograph have ended the generational handing-down of musical and vocal cultural artifacts, and have degraded music to the endless repetition of the same fixed…
.
.
>an obvious counterexample ChatGPT uses sub-word tokens. This is not a surprising outcome.
On the contrary. My example is to show that ChatGPT does fairly well with constrained questions and textual forms, and gets worse with broader questions. "What's new with you" is a relatively common greeting.
>stuff nobody said >Given that the names were made-up and unique, and have zero hits on google You said it yourself. I just don't see the novelty that a machine learning algorithm, trained on huge amounts of stuff…
I've tried this out. It doesn't seem to matter how you phrase your request for "alternative music notation", it suggests colouring it in. Which is very easily found on a Wikipedia page describing an existing system used…
I'm baffled how people are so amazed by easily-found existing ideas being presented by an arrogant chatbot.
You're amazed because a training set, largely based on the contents of the internet since about 2011, is able to find words that rhyme with arbitrary word endings? 4 stanzas. My bad. Still not impressed.
The lionisation of GPT technology (which is nothing special, apart from the scale of execution) is quite embarrassing. Have we forgotten that each of us has, within our own heads, a computer vastly superior to this toy…
Your original comment made a big deal of a poem-writer being able to incorporate unique words that you gave to it in the first place. No, that's not very interesting. Writing a "4-line humourous poem" is also trivial.…
Given that you supplied ChatGPT with those names, which still have the very ordinary properties of rhyming with other words and denoting a particular person or being, that's not very interesting.
The string of developments that started with the phonograph have ended the generational handing-down of musical and vocal cultural artifacts, and have degraded music to the endless repetition of the same fixed…