How Do You Use ChatGPT?

[Omar del Sur]

does anybody have resources on chatgpt? know how to use it? thoughts on it (based on experience)? explanation of how to use it?

I want to be honest. I think I'm inherently sort of conservative as sort of a personality trait. when I first saw people with blue hair I was really shocked and kind of alarmed by it. and rightfully so imo. but tbh I'm the same with tech. I didn't want to accept chatgpt. I was a chatgptphobe. so now I'm in an early stage of trying to overcome my chatgptphobia and get to know chatgpt.

 

[The alchemist]

How ChatGPT works in my own words (a conversation with another person -- don't want to modify it for this context so take it how it is delivered (there is something there about how to improve it in the second):

"LLMs are stochastic parrots. It's good statistics, but not value-correlating. It's not a metaphor for the mind.

"It's important to note that if the ChatGPT creators claim slight consciousness or allude to a potentiality of such in the future, they mostly come from the need to market and put interest in their products. A level of overinflation carries weight in the monetary sphere, not the scientific discourse (discernment POV). With this, we come to a necessary conversational crosspoint, where drawing the required arbitrary lines between scientific and technological principles and their impacts, and overselling potentials, a needed process for a business but not favorable for the conversation about the real impact of such engineering feats, becomes blurred, diluting the general public senses to dogmatic proportions over time.

"This sensationalism (broad-based narrative sociocultural framing is the new route for corporations to gain long-term emotional interests and attention from future consumers by seeping billions into stimuli biases over time in the social sphere, becoming an expansive, lasting infrastructure--something that was not possible before) is, in practical language, an act of overselling deliberately and superseding what the company operators realistically hold as their products' capacity. Despite this, they push their nonsense to increase the market share value on a pure anticipatory range to scale the possible product-consumer interests. And this is one of the workings of economic generation. One reason these large companies go further on this path is that LLMs are costly and energy intensive, and integrated into their systems of casual search engine use, for example, is practically workable. That much time spent on a limited or flawed process gets converted to drive business, a profit model package, utility-driven for profit motive. Ironic for the pragmatic philosophical side, namely that one opts for practicability instead of meaning and real value because the latter is too hard (to deconstruct and redefine when one is struggling to grow, then define it as equivalent growth, mistaking that for linear progress).

"One has to wonder if economic pressures are the main driver for motivating these processes. Are they, by default, always driven to their lowest means for quick trade-off activity? In a way, maybe the economic parameters set all hypothetical operative simulations to lower levels, where pushing loftier ambitions and real value can never exist to extend great leaps. But I digress.

"LLMs are not about interpreting how language relates to the perceived world but how words relate to each other through mimicking statistical patterns -- regurgitation. It lacks an intuitive abstraction and does not understand deep perceptual structures as we do."

--

The second conversation with someone that misunderstood me from another statement of mine:

"Let me not be too abstract while trying to muster something that represents what my comment insights upon. The difference here is the word probability scale subordination and stochastic parameters, and truth-value confirmation probability scale, are separate things. It cannot lock into assessing a long-form coherent picture of what it says. It forms dots around a bird in a 2D plot, not knowing what a bird is or that it indeed forms a distribution scale of a bird, to put it into an analogy. And what it forms of a bird in million small dots is only what it is told a bird is without actually having any depth to know even if the non-bird independent million dots form a bird, and it can never take the leap of confirming it (it just computationally have a probability reading on each individual dot-position and the probabilistic framework brute-force leap on the next dot-position on a familiarized "confidence/accuracy" (the thing you were talking about). So the machine is misleadingly not on the same page I was referring to on top of being stochastic. They haven't set parameters for those things because I believe imbuing that quality is too complex, maybe keeping track of superimposing another separate system quality to the whole base that works independently and even more complex and multi-cross-sectional and that forms a sophisticated too complex relativistic independent manifold (theoretically multi-edge spatial as a metaphor) that reaches out but feeds into each other (this is not 2D but 3D, going from the mentioned analogy) is too far out of reach and these large language models should never be confused with that. It literally says so itself, it lacks confidence reading to how true something is, it only does what it is trained to do and applies some internal system, the higher order layers are not what it probabilistically gleams with confidence or accuracy, it's lower level (not that higher order can be reached by scaling at all; it works differently as I tried to explain).

"All in all, it cannot determine the credibility of the sources. It assumes the training data gave it the "quality" data (which has been refined many times over to reduce "noise" within the parameter-ground and "clean" the process within that limitation). It is the same reason it is totally useless if you let it go into uncertainty ranges.

"Well my response was maybe a bit of an over-qualification but I find that it was needed and hopefully I hope to not delve into this in-depth explanation again anytime soon. Because I find this topic not exciting, haha. I rather call ChatGPT stupid like an average take (not that it ever can be stupid either (it isn't even qualified to be called that))"

How to use it? You can use it in many ways. For example, you can ask it a basic question and it will answer, like a Google search. Other times you can improve knowledge as I can show you bellow since this is getting too long.

 

[The alchemist]

For example, I wanted to know more about string theory. I don't believe string theory is the right track but nevertheless I wanted to learn about it trhough basic questions I had, so I wanted to leverage ChatGPT as a platform to engage in:

How is the string related to the geometry of the extra dimensions? Is it attached to each string or is it independent
ChatGPT
In string theory, the extra dimensions are postulated to be small and curled up, and the way they are curled up can have a profound effect on the properties of the strings. In particular, the geometry of the extra dimensions can determine the mass and other properties of the particles that are associated with the string.
In the most common version of string theory, called the "Calabi-Yau" compactification, the extra dimensions are compactified on a six-dimensional space with a special geometry that is shaped like a Calabi-Yau manifold. This manifold has a complex structure that can affect the way the string vibrates and oscillates, and thus determine the properties of the particles that are produced.
So to answer your question, the geometry of the extra dimensions is intimately related to the properties of the string and the particles it produces. The string is not independent of the geometry; rather, it is influenced by it and its properties depend on it.


Is th calabi-yau manifold supposed to be a closed system in a way
ChatGPT
In string theory, the Calabi-Yau manifold is a closed and compact space. "Closed" means that the manifold has no boundary, and "compact" means that the manifold is finite in size and contains no infinite or unbounded regions.
In the context of string theory, the Calabi-Yau manifold is used as a compactification space for the extra dimensions. The idea is that the six extra dimensions of space are curled up and compactified on a Calabi-Yau manifold, which is a closed and finite space. This means that the extra dimensions are not infinitely extended, but rather have a finite size and shape that is determined by the specific geometry of the Calabi-Yau manifold.
The compactification of the extra dimensions on a Calabi-Yau manifold is an important feature of string theory because it allows for the consistent inclusion of gravity into the theory. In a sense, the Calabi-Yau manifold provides a kind of "boundary" for the extra dimensions, which allows for the formulation of a consistent theory of quantum gravity in a finite and well-defined space.


is mass in string theory within the dimensions related to the vibrations or is it only energy
ChatGPT
In string theory, mass is related to the vibrational modes of the strings. The vibrational modes of a string determine the energy of the string, and this energy can be interpreted as the mass of the particle that is associated with the string.
In the simplest version of string theory, called bosonic string theory, the vibrational modes of the string correspond to different mass levels of the string. The ground state of the string corresponds to the lowest energy state, which is interpreted as the massless particle that is associated with the string. The excited states of the string correspond to higher energy levels, which are interpreted as massive particles with different masses.
In more advanced versions of string theory, such as superstring theory, the vibrational modes of the string are more complex and correspond to both mass and other properties of the particles, such as their spin and charge.
So to answer your question, mass in string theory is related to the vibrational modes of the strings, and this mass is interpreted as the energy of the string. The relationship between mass and energy is a fundamental concept in physics, and it is a key feature of string theory as well.


so in a way, mass and energy that is caused by the vibration state of the string is one and the same in separate dimensions
ChatGPT
Yes, that's correct. In string theory, mass and energy are intimately related, and are both determined by the vibrational states of the strings. The vibrational states of the string correspond to different energy levels, and these energy levels are interpreted as the mass of the particle that is associated with the string.
Furthermore, in string theory, the concept of mass and energy is not limited to a specific dimension. The strings in string theory exist in a higher-dimensional space-time, and the vibrational modes of the strings can correspond to properties such as mass and energy that are experienced in the 3+1-dimensional space-time that we observe.
So in a way, mass and energy are two sides of the same coin in string theory, and both are determined by the vibrational states of the strings, which exist in a higher-dimensional space-time.


Does this mean that the dimensional relationship to each string is different to 3+1 spacetime but somehow corresponds
ChatGPT
Yes, that's correct. In string theory, the strings exist in a space-time that has more dimensions than the four dimensions (three spatial dimensions plus one time dimension) that we observe in our everyday world. The extra dimensions in string theory are usually assumed to be compactified on a small scale and are not directly observable, but they can have important effects on the properties of the strings and the particles that they produce.
The relationship between the extra dimensions and the 3+1-dimensional space-time that we observe is complex and can be difficult to visualize. However, in string theory, the vibrational modes of the strings can correspond to properties such as mass and energy that we observe in 3+1 dimensions, even though the strings themselves exist in a higher-dimensional space-time.
This correspondence between the higher-dimensional space-time and the 3+1-dimensional space-time is a fundamental feature of string theory, and it plays a crucial role in understanding the properties of the particles that are produced by the strings. The details of this correspondence depend on the specific formulation of string theory being considered, and are still an active area of research.


does each string have its dimensional space-time existence relative to the 3+1 spacetime that superimposes
ChatGPT
In string theory, each string exists in a higher-dimensional space-time that is usually assumed to have more dimensions than the 3+1 dimensions that we observe. The exact number of extra dimensions and their geometry depend on the specific formulation of string theory being considered.
The vibrational modes of the strings are determined by the geometry of the extra dimensions, and the properties of the particles that are produced by the strings, including their mass and other quantum numbers, are determined by the vibrational modes. The vibrational modes of the strings can correspond to properties that we observe in the 3+1-dimensional space-time, even though the strings themselves exist in a higher-dimensional space-time.
So in a sense, each string has its own dimensional space-time existence, which is determined by the specific geometry of the extra dimensions. However, the vibrational modes of the strings can produce particles that exist in the 3+1-dimensional space-time that we observe, and these particles can interact with each other according to the laws of physics that we are familiar with.
It is important to note that the precise relationship between the extra dimensions and the 3+1-dimensional space-time is a complex and subtle issue, and is the subject of ongoing research in string theory.

 

[The alchemist]

Continuing:


does this mean 3+1 spacetime is an echo architecture of the higher order dimensional space time of the string vibration and geometry dimensions
ChatGPT
In some sense, you could say that the 3+1-dimensional space-time that we observe is an "echo" or a projection of the higher-dimensional space-time in which the strings of string theory exist. The geometry and properties of the extra dimensions can affect the vibrational modes of the strings, and these vibrational modes can in turn produce particles that we observe in our 3+1-dimensional space-time.
However, it's important to note that the relationship between the extra dimensions and the 3+1-dimensional space-time is more complex than a simple projection or echo. The properties of the extra dimensions, such as their geometry and topology, can have important effects on the properties of the particles produced by the strings, and can give rise to phenomena that are not observed in our 3+1-dimensional space-time.
Furthermore, the precise relationship between the extra dimensions and the 3+1-dimensional space-time is still an area of active research in string theory, and is a subject of ongoing investigation. So while you could say that the 3+1-dimensional space-time is an echo or projection of the higher-dimensional space-time, the reality is more subtle and complex than a simple analogy can capture.


do the vibrations in strings move faster than the speed of light
ChatGPT
In string theory, there is no notion of "vibrations in strings" moving faster than the speed of light in a vacuum, which is a fundamental speed limit in our universe. The speed of light is a universal constant that appears in many physical laws, including Einstein's theory of relativity, and is a key feature of the structure of spacetime.
In string theory, the vibrations of the strings correspond to different energy levels and mass states of the particles that the strings can produce. These energy levels are not directly related to the speed of the vibrations themselves. However, it is true that the massless particles that are produced by the strings, such as photons, travel at the speed of light in a vacuum.
It is also important to note that in string theory, the concept of spacetime itself is more complex than in classical physics. The higher-dimensional space-time that contains the strings can have a different structure and geometry than the 3+1-dimensional space-time that we observe. In some formulations of string theory, there are theoretical limits to how fast objects can move in the higher-dimensional space-time, but these limits are not related to the speed of the vibrations of the strings themselves.


I meant that does the vibrational movement and the resonance have faster movement than the inner workings of the light
ChatGPT
In string theory, the vibrations of the strings do not move faster than the speed of light. The speed of light in a vacuum is an absolute speed limit in our universe, according to Einstein's theory of relativity, and the vibrations of the strings are subject to this limit just like any other physical phenomenon.
The properties of the strings, including their vibrational modes and the particles that they can produce, are determined by the geometry of the extra dimensions that are postulated in string theory. This geometry can affect the behavior of the strings and the particles that they produce, but it does not allow the vibrations of the strings to exceed the speed of light.
It is also worth noting that the concept of "resonance" in string theory is a bit different than in classical physics. In classical physics, resonance refers to the phenomenon where a system oscillates at a particular frequency that is determined by the properties of the system itself. In string theory, the vibrational modes of the strings are also determined by the properties of the system, but they are also affected by the geometry of the extra dimensions in which the strings exist. This can lead to phenomena that are not observed in classical resonance, but it does not allow the vibrations of the strings to exceed the speed of light.


does it come close to the speed of light
ChatGPT
In string theory, the vibrations of the strings do not travel at a fixed speed, but rather their speed is determined by the properties of the string and the geometry of the extra dimensions in which the string exists.
It is possible for the energy associated with the vibrational modes of the string to be very large, which would correspond to a very high speed. However, the speed of the vibrations of the string is still subject to the fundamental speed limit of the speed of light in a vacuum, as predicted by Einstein's theory of relativity. Therefore, the vibrations of the strings cannot exceed the speed of light in a vacuum.
Furthermore, it is important to note that the concept of "speed" in string theory is more complex than in classical physics, due to the fact that string theory posits the existence of extra dimensions beyond the familiar 3+1 dimensions. The precise relationship between the speed of the vibrations of the string and the geometry of the extra dimensions is still an area of active research in string theory, and is a subject of ongoing investigation.


so there might be possible in the future that we find out that the complex workings of the energy and vibration might in a way work beyond the limit of the speed of light by applying different rule-set because of the higher order dimensional capacities. So disanalogous to the conditions of speed of light but in a way phenomenologically exceeding
ChatGPT
While it is always possible that new discoveries could change our understanding of the laws of physics, it is currently not believed that the vibrations of strings in string theory can exceed the speed of light. The speed of light is a fundamental constant of the universe, and it is predicted by both Einstein's theory of relativity and by many other observations and experiments.
In string theory, the extra dimensions beyond the familiar 3+1 dimensions are compactified, or curled up, so that they are effectively invisible at everyday length scales. While these extra dimensions can affect the behavior of strings and particles, they are still subject to the fundamental laws of physics that govern our universe, including the speed of light limit.
That being said, string theory is a highly theoretical and mathematically complex area of physics, and there is still much that is not understood about how it relates to our observed universe. Ongoing research in this field may lead to new insights and discoveries that could change our understanding of the behavior of strings and the properties of the extra dimensions in which they exist.


if the echo of the strings affects other dimensions, would it not technically be that this projection that affects different dimensions is skipping faster than the speed of light because it moves in complex ways
ChatGPT
The behavior of strings in string theory is a highly theoretical and complex area of physics, and there is still much that is not understood about how it relates to our observed universe. However, it is currently not believed that the vibrations of strings in string theory can exceed the speed of light.

The extra dimensions postulated in string theory are often described as being "curled up" or compactified, so that they are effectively invisible at everyday length scales. These extra dimensions can affect the behavior of strings and particles, but they are still subject to the fundamental laws of physics that govern our universe, including the speed of light limit.
It is important to note that the concept of "speed" in the context of string theory and the extra dimensions is complex, and it is not always clear how to define it in a straightforward way. However, it is still believed that the fundamental speed limit of the universe is the speed of light in a vacuum, and that the behavior of strings and the properties of the extra dimensions are subject to this limit.

That being said, string theory is still a highly active area of research, and ongoing investigations may lead to new insights and discoveries that could change our understanding of the behavior of strings and the properties of the extra dimensions in which they exist.

 

[The alchemist]

Here is the last post of a back-and-forth I had about Socialism/Marxism and told it to stop fucking around. The machine can be buggy and seem like a total c*nt, so you need to tell it to do what it is told as it carries biases:

Me:
I think your response was inadequate and I gave a pretty nuanced and challenging conversation, that seeks to analyze beyond what people usually parrot from both sides, not that I am not saying it probably hasn't been mentioned in a different light before by others.

The conditions of demands of the collective changes, of course -- this is called a straw-man where you interpreted my take on "the needs will not change part" with an assumption that I think the world is not dynamic or expressed that. This is not the case. I meant in that time if you remember this exchange history, the external demands will, for the most part, stay somewhat consistent to fulfill a consistent need while the contribution bias will reflect that regardless of how internal friction happens (unless it hampers the outputs), and that the reorganization is to appease one collective over another, yet the contribution affinity for what is more valued by the collective is still there. Anyway, this has been exhausted as it seems you have a strong ideological bias toward Socialism and once I start repeating myself to a machine is when the machine doesn't measure up.

I am dissatisfied with you not processing my take on the tendencies of authoritarianism. I had a strong theoretical presupposition laid out in this conversational history for you to see that this is not some silly "Stalin bad, socialism bad" argument.

The significant contribution is irrelevant to this particular topic; one can tell a Marxist that Capitalism has even more contribution and they will object to it being a good system regardless. So let's not start that silly conversation where apologetic discourse forms because the criticism pokes holes in the proposition.

ChatGPT:
I apologize if my previous response did not fully address your nuanced and challenging conversation. As an AI language model, I strive to provide the best responses possible, but I understand that my limitations may not always meet your expectations.

Regarding the issue of changing collective needs, I apologize if I misinterpreted your point. It is true that external demands may stay somewhat consistent to fulfill a consistent need, but internal dynamics can still impact the efficiency and effectiveness of a socialist system. And yes, reorganization can lead to internal friction, which can impact the outputs of the system.

As for the issue of authoritarian tendencies in socialism, I understand your point about the strong ideological commitment required for socialist systems to function effectively. It is true that authoritarianism has been a problem in many historical examples of socialist systems, and this is a topic that deserves careful analysis and discussion.

Regarding the issue of contribution bias and its relevance to this topic, I agree that it is not the most relevant point to the discussion at hand. The debate between capitalism and socialism is complex and multifaceted, and there are valid arguments and criticisms on both sides.

Thank you for your feedback, and I apologize again if my previous response was inadequate. I am always striving to improve my ability to engage in nuanced and meaningful conversations.

 

[Omar del Sur]

@The alchemist thanks for the info on chatgpt... it does seem a bit overhyped from what I hear

 

[The alchemist]

@The alchemist thanks for the info on chatgpt... it does seem a bit overhyped from what I hear

It's just a tool, man. Take it how it is and don't believe the hype of some sentient talk. Although they will change things in how organizations use it which can make a few differences in the tech fields in how they integrate it. There are concerns about those tools too.

 

[xiin-finiin]

does anybody have resources on chatgpt? know how to use it? thoughts on it (based on experience)? explanation of how to use it?

I want to be honest. I think I'm inherently sort of conservative as sort of a personality trait. when I first saw people with blue hair I was really shocked and kind of alarmed by it. and rightfully so imo. but tbh I'm the same with tech. I didn't want to accept chatgpt. I was a chatgptphobe. so now I'm in an early stage of trying to overcome my chatgptphobia and get to know chatgpt.

i have used it quite a bit for math, and the one thing i realized is that it's good at recalling information. So if you have a topic you want to learn a little more about, you can ask it to explain it, and most of the time it'll give the correct explanation. However, there are cases where it will give you the wrong answer, in those cases, its very important to know enough about the topic to be able to spot its mistakes. So, imho, don't use it for topics you know nothing about. first read actual articles, then when you have a vague understanding, use chatgpt. chatgpt is very dump, people are freaking out over nothing, so don't be intimidated by it. The only reason it looks smart is because it's been trained on huge amounts of data. below is an example of me convincing it that 2+7 = 10. As for how to use it, i think you can just go to their website and play around with it till you get a hang of it, then you can use it for actual stuff.

 

[Yaraye]

i have used it quite a bit for math, and the one thing i realized is that it's good at recalling information. So if you have a topic you want to learn a little more about, you can ask it to explain it, and most of the time it'll give the correct explanation. However, there are cases where it will give you the wrong answer, in those cases, its very important to know enough about the topic to be able to spot its mistakes. So, imho, don't use it for topics you know nothing about. first read actual articles, then when you have a vague understanding, use chatgpt. chatgpt is very dump, people are freaking out over nothing, so don't be intimidated by it. The only reason it looks smart is because it's been trained on huge amounts of data. below is an example of me convincing it that 2+7 = 10. As for how to use it, i think you can just go to their website and play around with it till you get a hang of it, then you can use it for actual stuff. View attachment 277435

wtf?