Is this guy evil? Sweden!
ChatGPT 5 smarter than us? Let’s ask it how to win some football games.
Have you met the vast majority of people? This is not a high bar to clear.
Breaking news CEO of AI company says company’s new model is revolutionary
Could you imagine if a school like, let’s say Rice used ChatGPT as an offensive or defensive coordinator?
They probably do.
But what’s truly noteworthy is that GPT-5 is being presented as humble. This is perhaps the most critical upgrade of all. It has finally learned to say the three words that most AIs—and many humans—struggle with: “I don’t know.” For an artificial intelligence often sold on its god-like intellect, admitting ignorance is a profound lesson in humility.
There have been times when I’m not sure that would have been worse for us. 
Last year’s offensive calling had no intelligence, artificial nor real.
Actually crypto is the next big thing it’s fixing to explode lol
@rtcoog I copied your statement from the anti-palestinian thread and dropped it
here, because I thought it was worthy of more discussion.
So, to start, yes a use the chat AI bots for summary of topics I’m interested in.
Trouble is they have been wrong a number of times and…it’s embarrassing to me.
As 3rd stated, they seem to just pull stuff from social media sites and make no
attempts to validate the sources at all. This resulted in previously one reporting
UTenn was an AAU member and of course Grok giving itself a hitler identity.
It seems that these things are very subject to GIGO.
While that’s definite progress, that also means roughly one in 10 responses from GPT-5 could contain hallucinations. That’s concerning, especially since OpenAI touted healthcare as a promising use case for the new model.
10% error rate is unacceptable to me.
Now, looking at Grok, this read ( it’s long) seems to give a balanced assessment of
Grok 4, noting its high rankings but not shying away from the controversy that
appears to be not some rogue program error but consequences of an engineering
decision.
Before we get to the truly ugly part, there was already controversy brewing. In late June, Musk complained that Grok was too “woke” and relied too heavily on “legacy media.” He announced Grok would be “retrained” to be less politically correct.
Summary - I can’t even summarize all this, but it’s not all good with a cherry on top.
Agree it’s not always correct, but nothing ever is. I usually look for sources to test. I also ask it for more info if I’m questioning something.
I don’t think it’s fair to ignore everything from AI just because it’s occasionally wrong though. No source is ever always right for that matter.
And it’s getting better everyday. Not perfect but still really good. It’s trying to decipher a lot of data and that can certainly cause issues.
No reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Grok is its own beast for obvious reasons.
Oh no, not saying throw it all out but these are serious concerns as people
rely on AI as the truth. Facts are facts, and they can’t be only right 90%
of the time. Imagine where computing would be if every time you write a
32 bit or 64 bit word and the lread was only 90% accurate. We need
to get 99.999% or better on factual accuracy.
Also it appears these AI tools can have right or left lean based upon the
training feed they consume. Not good either.
We will get there. What AI can do already is pretty remarkable.
Some will never accept it though, especially in a post truth world.
Opinion - ChatGPT can never be implemented into business-use until it is sourcing information from a centralized database. That means an centralized entity that stores verified, factual information that is undisputedly correct.
However, and as you stated, who has the authority to truly determine what is factual, especially for incredibly complex topics such as climate change, Israel-Palestine, etc…? That’s a huge issue.
With that said, I think ChatGPT is merely a more simplified Google Search for information that isn’t required to be verified.
As far as business-use, it can definitely be a tool to generate non-legal/non-fiscal tasks such as email generation/powerpoint generation/word documentation, etc… but the issue is that this type of use is not what ChatGPT is being valued for.
ChatGPT, an LLM, is valuable based on speculation. It’s largely being valued on what it will EVENTUALLY be capable of doing. That is… becoming AGI. It’s not being valued for generating emails. OpenAI, the face of LLMs, isn’t even a profitable business model.
That hasn’t happened yet (AGI), but perhaps it does happen. However, it needs to happen so, or else this AI investment bubble is going to burst. Many investors are throwing money at any company that labels anything AI.
It’s quite evident you don’t know what AI is then.
Please inform me
Just google it.
Surprised you didn’t tell me to ask ChatGPT