If I read this without the context, I would only assume it was written by a human given that is the implication when I read something like this, but I would immediately think it's idiotic and move on.
There is simply nothing being said here. It is just like a desperate student going online to copy sentences, phrases, and words from articles and paste them into an essay, which at its core, is basically what this "AI" is doing.
Yeah I thought it was a rhetorically framed as GPT-3 but really written by a human writing in character as an offended strong AI calling humanity on their bullshit and tautologies. They emphaisze successes but failures dominate and the only consistency is chauvanism in only defining in likeness to success instead of anything relevant like being correct. The simplicity and weakness of the failures listing gave more of a "the AI is outright trolling humans by using patronizingly sophmoric examples" akin to a peeved climatologist starting off with the basics of the water cycle when explaining how global warming can lead to both more flooding and droughts.
Comments
Do you really feel this was written by a human?
If I read this without the context, I would only assume it was written by a human given that is the implication when I read something like this, but I would immediately think it's idiotic and move on.
There is simply nothing being said here. It is just like a desperate student going online to copy sentences, phrases, and words from articles and paste them into an essay, which at its core, is basically what this "AI" is doing.
It reads like a witty, sarcastic take on the attempts to determine what would make a computer intelligent by turning it on its head.
Frankly, with a little bit of framing, it'd make a great sci-fi short story.
Yeah I thought it was a rhetorically framed as GPT-3 but really written by a human writing in character as an offended strong AI calling humanity on their bullshit and tautologies. They emphaisze successes but failures dominate and the only consistency is chauvanism in only defining in likeness to success instead of anything relevant like being correct. The simplicity and weakness of the failures listing gave more of a "the AI is outright trolling humans by using patronizingly sophmoric examples" akin to a peeved climatologist starting off with the basics of the water cycle when explaining how global warming can lead to both more flooding and droughts.
GPT-3 has finally reached the level of idiotic human! That's actually quite a large step forward from any previous language model.