ChatGPT Analyzes Dan Hurley’s Defense… | The Boneyard

ChatGPT Analyzes Dan Hurley’s Defense…

JustbrewitMan

JustbrewitMan

Joined
Jan 19, 2017
Messages
3,663
Reaction Score
27,451
FAA80B58-936B-4D87-BFCB-D7131D2142B9.jpeg


AI clearly has a ways to go…no mention of the high hedge…
 
.-.
I'm actually impressed that it acknowledges it doesn't know some things here.

When I've seen people ask it about the Japanese language, it just makes random crap up half the time.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
I had never seen ChatGPT before. I was expecting it to be a lot better.
Expand ...
Not surprisingly it seems like a lot of the output depends on the way you ask the questions. Plus this is the free public-facing beta version. So I’m sure they have a more advanced model.

It’s a little disturbing to see how quickly it spits out what is actually a reasonably thoughtful answer that is about 10x more coherent than most of the posts here on the Yard. :D
 
I feel like Dan Hurley is trying to make Adama more appealing to scouts by showcasing hium as a 4 who can bang but also step out... Clearly this showcasing comes at the expense of our team D, as Adama isn't ready to guard on the perimeter & we are not fast enough in rotations with them on the floor together. Doesn't mean it can't happen eventually (see Grant Williams) but i'm hoping it doesn't become a constant with this team. On a seperate note, we are paying the price for not having a floor general.
 
.-.
ChatGPT is fun and can answer some real questions, but in this early stage sometimes the info is unreliable so beware.

Note the there is no real time information -- it's based on data up until 2021.
 
I did try ChatGPT for Haikus, but didn't use any it gave me. For any of you struggling with Haikus or ignoring the rules, it may help. No idea if @Hans Sprungfeld approves.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
I had never seen ChatGPT before. I was expecting it to be a lot better.
Expand ...
As someone who works in the Conversational AI space - you are high as hell.

There are a lot of things in the world to be unimpressed about but there is some major dunning-kruger happening in the public discourse about Chat GPT. There is a reason Microsoft is trying to throw $10B at them to help with search, and the closer you get to industry expertise in ML/Langauge/AI the more amazed people are at the quality they have produced. The almost impossible and mindbending capability of the ChatGPT free form data ingestion/intent modeling/language parsing - its one of those rare technologies that are a demarcation between before and after.

The entire history of computers/computing has been humans trying to bridge the gap in communicating with machines effectively so they can do more and more complex tasks. levers, mainframe punch cards, keyboards, touchscreens... these are all middleware to the obvious communications technology that humans are born with - our voice and language capabilities.

This breaks down that gap and will completely transform the world in the next 5-10 years. Think Jetson sh!zt. OpenAI is certainly a leading player here but tons of Voice AI/Conversational AI/Language ML companies are doing amazing stuff.

/fin rant
 
Last edited:
.-.
bmayuc said:
As someone who works in the Conversational AI space - you are high as hell.

There are a lot of things in the world to be unimpressed about but there is some major dunning-kruger happening in the public discourse about Chat GPT. There is a reason Microsoft is trying to throw $10B at them to help with search, and the closer you get to industry expertise in ML/Langauge/AI the more amazed people are at the quality they have produced. The almost impossible and mindbending capability of the ChatGPT free form data ingestion/intent modeling/language parsing - its one of those rare technologies that are a demarcation between before and after.

The entire history of computers/computing has been humans trying to bridge the gap in communicating with machines effectively so they can do more and more complex tasks. levers, mainframe punch cards, keyboards, touchscreens... these are all middleware to the obvious communications technology that humans are born with - our voice and language capabilities.

This breaks down that gap and will completely transform the world in the next 5-10 years. Think Jetson sh!zt. OpenAI is certainly a leading player here but tons of Voice AI/Conversational AI/Language ML companies are doing amazing stuff.

/fin rant
Expand ...
Dunning-Kruger is @nelsonmuntz's middle name.
 
Can it give me tonight’s winning Mega Millions numbers?
 
nelsonmuntz said:
I honestly don't get the business case for spending a nickel on Conversational AI. The AI market is flooded with capital, so by the time a technology is developed that really works, there will probably be 1000 other technologies that can do virtually the same thing, meaning there will be no pricing power for the winner.
Expand ...
There's a very obvious business case for them to be acquisition targets for large tech/software players that have a build or buy decision. There are tons of applications for this technology, especially if you're a company that uses a cloud infrastructure company to deliver services already (Amazon, microsoft, google, etc.) and there's clearly a first mover advantage here if done well.
 
WhereistheDove? said:
There's a very obvious business case for them to be acquisition targets for large tech/software players that have a build or buy decision. There are tons of applications for this technology, especially if you're a company that uses a cloud infrastructure company to deliver services already (Amazon, microsoft, google, etc.) and there's clearly a first mover advantage here if done well.
Expand ...

Every tech company in the world is already building AI into its applications. They are all better off building AI into their existing applications rather than using a one-size-fits-all chatbot like ChatGPT appears to be. Chatbots are customer service, so no company is going to pay up for a slightly better version of whatever ChatBot they have now.

Building a company to sell it is generally a pretty good strategy in tech, except you don't want to get into a sector where there are too many sellers, because that drives everyone's price down. How many AI companies are Google, Amazon and Microsoft going to buy, and at what price? Given the huge number of generic AI companies being funded, you might be able to buy one for the price of a modest beach house in 5 years. Many of them are going to go bust, so those will be even cheaper.

"First mover advantage" is mostly a relic of an era where there were high capital costs and network externalities, and even then it didn't work that well. Google was probably not even one of the first 10 search engines. Microsoft was not first for word processing or spreadsheet applications. Apple did get to the PC market early, then failed spectacularly, and then found a second life (rare for a tech company) as a consumer devices company. IBM had a first mover advantage, and now it is mostly a professional services company. Amazon didn't really break out in retail until recently, and is still losing money on just about everything it sells. Technology is an industry of creative destruction, and there is always someone coming up behind the new new thing to displace it.

You do see more first mover advantage in smaller markets that do not attract that much capital, because getting critical mass is easier and it is not worth it for followers to spend the time and money to catch up. Even then, in an area where venture capital is plentiful, even those markets get competitive pretty quickly.

ChatGPT is trying to take over the world in a market that has already attracted billions in capital. Good luck with that.
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
Every tech company in the world is already building AI into its applications. They are all better off building AI into their existing applications rather than using a one-size-fits-all chatbot like ChatGPT appears to be. Chatbots are customer service, so no company is going to pay up for a slightly better version of whatever ChatBot they have now.

Building a company to sell it is generally a pretty good strategy in tech, except you don't want to get into a sector where there are too many sellers, because that drives everyone's price down. How many AI companies are Google, Amazon and Microsoft going to buy, and at what price? Given the huge number of generic AI companies being funded, you might be able to buy one for the price of a modest beach house in 5 years. Many of them are going to go bust, so those will be even cheaper.

"First mover advantage" is mostly a relic of an era where there were high capital costs and network externalities, and even then it didn't work that well. Google was probably not even one of the first 10 search engines. Microsoft was not first for word processing or spreadsheet applications. Apple did get to the PC market early, then failed spectacularly, and then found a second life (rare for a tech company) as a consumer devices company. IBM had a first mover advantage, and now it is mostly a professional services company. Amazon didn't really break out in retail until recently, and is still losing money on just about everything it sells. Technology is an industry of creative destruction, and there is always someone coming up behind the new new thing to displace it.

You do see more first mover advantage in smaller markets that do not attract that much capital, because getting critical mass is easier and it is not worth it for followers to spend the time and money to catch up. Even then, in an area where venture capital is plentiful, even those markets get competitive pretty quickly.

ChatGPT is trying to take over the world in a market that has already attracted billions in capital. Good luck with that.
Expand ...
I think "customer service" is wildly underrepresenting the potential applications here and may be why you're so far off from the market's view of these technologies. I don't think anyone is buying ChatGPT to bolt on to their applications. Big tech companies are interested in the underlying tech and the workforce.
 
WhereistheDove? said:
I think "customer service" is wildly underrepresenting the potential applications here and may be why you're so far off from the market's view of these technologies. I don't think anyone is buying ChatGPT to bolt on to their applications. Big tech companies are interested in the underlying tech and the workforce.
Expand ...

Everyone is already doing it. There are thousands of companies working on AI applications for specific business problems, and these companies have installed bases of customers that they can use to teach machines.

Or someone can buy ChatGPT. Actually, if ChatGPT was smart, they would raise a boatload of money at an inflated valuation, then go out and buy technology companies to implement ChatGPT into actual business applications. This is basically what Amazon did.
 
I asked ChatGPT what the biggest number is. ChatGPT spun and spun and errored out. Maybe next time.
 
WhereistheDove? said:
I think "customer service" is wildly underrepresenting the potential applications here and may be why you're so far off from the market's view of these technologies. I don't think anyone is buying ChatGPT to bolt on to their applications. Big tech companies are interested in the underlying tech and the workforce.
Expand ...

"This is for customer service" is so blind to the actual stakes here that its actually sort of amazing. I get not understanding this stuff its wild next frontier world-changing stuff. But at least he can have the humility to not make himself look like a jackass.

The equivalent here is someone in like 1994 being like - "Internet website shopping? I don't get it - I can just go to Caldor or JC Penney and get whatever I need. And why would I pay for shipping? And can't every company just build their own website? What's the difference? I just don't see it."

Microsoft isn't interested in ChatGPT because its going to like automate customer service for Office 360. They are interested in tuning it to take down Google's search dominance. So, that single application of this technology is "POSSIBLY DETHRONING THE CORE PRODUCT FOR THE 4th biggest company by market cap in the entire world."

Now @nelsonmuntz you might say - Microsoft is crazy!! Surely google, who has a wee bit of AI expertise themselves, agrees with Nelson that this is all commodotized $29.99 chatbots, right?

They are shzztting bricks and reorganizing their entire AI/Product organization to counter this threat mid year -

A New Chat Bot Is a ‘Code Red’ for Google’s Search Business

Screen Shot 2023-01-13 at 11.26.01 PM.png




The actual stakes here are are "owning every piece of written or spoken language interaction that you have in your entire life" - across all your commerce and services, your learning and information needs, your personal life and daily schedule, etc. Every piece of technology you use, every product or device that you have need to interact with. Oh, and the moment you deploy it, it takes its billions of interactions of datasets, and now starts creating a highly optimized version of that model and learning you specifically and how you personally talk, the inflections and vocabulary you use, etc etc.

People gravitate toward the best UX for whatever they are looking to do. Its why Apps murdered mobile browsing, and why Google is now modern day all encompassing information center.

The companies that adopt and deploy this technology - which is for 99% of all businesses wayyyyyy outside the scope of their resources to hire teams to build and integrate this stuff, so they need to tap partners/startups/businesses that specialize in it to do it for them - get shockingly good ROI compared to almost any other intervention, and also get their teams experience in conceptually understanding AI/ML at a basic level.
 
Last edited:
evmore said:
I feel like Dan Hurley is trying to make Adama more appealing to scouts by showcasing hium as a 4 who can bang but also step out... Clearly this showcasing comes at the expense of our team D, as Adama isn't ready to guard on the perimeter & we are not fast enough in rotations with them on the floor together. Doesn't mean it can't happen eventually (see Grant Williams) but i'm hoping it doesn't become a constant with this team. On a seperate note, we are paying the price for not having a floor general.
Expand ...
Adama has played 11 minutes in 18 games at the 4 position, if that was Hurley's plan he's failing
 
bmayuc said:
"This is for customer service" is so blind to the actual stakes here that its actually sort of amazing. I get not understanding this stuff its wild next frontier world-changing stuff. But at least he can have the humility to not make himself look like a jackass.

The equivalent here is someone in like 1994 being like - "Internet website shopping? I don't get it - I can just go to Caldor or JC Penney and get whatever I need. And why would I pay for shipping? And can't every company just build their own website? What's the difference? I just don't see it."

Microsoft isn't interested in ChatGPT because its going to like automate customer service for Office 360. They are interested in tuning it to take down Google's search dominance. So, that single application of this technology is "POSSIBLY DETHRONING THE CORE PRODUCT FOR THE 4th biggest company by market cap in the entire world."

Now @nelsonmuntz you might say - Microsoft is crazy!! Surely google, who has a wee bit of AI expertise themselves, agrees with Nelson that this is all commodotized $29.99 chatbots, right?

They are shzztting bricks and reorganizing their entire AI/Product organization to counter this threat mid year -

A New Chat Bot Is a ‘Code Red’ for Google’s Search Business

View attachment 83014



The actual stakes here are are "owning every piece of written or spoken language interaction that you have in your entire life" - across all your commerce and services, your learning and information needs, your personal life and daily schedule, etc. Every piece of technology you use, every product or device that you have need to interact with. Oh, and the moment you deploy it, it takes its billions of interactions of datasets, and now starts creating a highly optimized version of that model and learning you specifically and how you personally talk, the inflections and vocabulary you use, etc etc.

People gravitate toward the best UX for whatever they are looking to do. Its why Apps murdered mobile browsing, and why Google is now modern day all encompassing information center.

The companies that adopt and deploy this technology - which is for 99% of all businesses wayyyyyy outside the scope of their resources to hire teams to build and integrate this stuff, so they need to tap partners/startups/businesses that specialize in it to do it for them - get shockingly good ROI compared to almost any other intervention, and also get their teams experience in conceptually understanding AI/ML at a basic level.
Expand ...

You seem to doubling down on the belief that this is the only AI company in the world. Just about every tech company in the world has an AI strategy. Many of them already have applications in the market that have an ROI. As someone with a bit of experience with past tech "revolutions", the likely outcome is that there will be hundreds of competitors that will all have good technology, and the winners will be the first (or second or third) to specific markets with targeted business applications. The tech generalists companies typically lose.

And as a reminder, Google was like the 7th or 10th search engine in the market. The AI market has a long way to go before we can declare a winner. And if you are right, and there is only one winner, then billions of dollars of investment capital is going to be flushed on all the losers, of which ChatGPT is likely to be one of them.

Apps didn't murder mobile browsing. Many B2B software solutions use web browsers because apps are often just functionally limited versions of the underlying software that also is effectively a separate code base that needs to be supported. Many B2C companies don't care about putting crappy, space-hogging, glitchy software on people's phones, but I wouldn't say that is indicative of apps murdering browser solutions.

Finally, the fundamental weakness with most B2C software technology, which you think is ChatGPT's ultimate destination, is that they are all advertiser based. Google has made some money selling software through devices and subscriptions, but it is still over 50% ad-based revenue. Almost all of Facebook's revenue is add based. That is something of a zero sum market. Maybe ChatGPT becomes the dominant ad destination in the future, although I have a hard time understanding how that even works with a language based AI solution.

In your final paragraph you seem to argue that every tech company will buy ChatGPT's solution and imbed it. First of all, a generalist AI solution will probably not have a great ROI in B2B applications. Second, you would have to believe that no tech CEO has ever heard of how that worked for Yahoo with Google to think that tech companies would integrate a future competitor into their own technology. Not a rhetorical question, but how stupid do you think Tech companies are?
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,600
Messages
4,584,991
Members
10,495
Latest member
rONIn


Top Bottom