Munchies:
You are a troll. There's nothing to understand.
Some people choose not to feed the trolls. Some choose to point them and make them dance.
FatGTP:
Your craving for attention is your motivation, not any moral considerations. You simply enjoy playing the superior one and don’t even notice how much you yourself are becoming what you hate. Outsiders rarely bother to analyze threads completely. They only see two people squabbling. You probably haven't noticed that yet.
Enas:
That implies you've ignored what people other than Munchies, have said in this thread.
Plus, Munchies has already told you she is a sadist who will troll back the trolls. You don’t need to assume her motivations, she already asserted that, and her behavior aligns with it.
At this point, for me, this is litteraly just an exercise to point out the logical fallacies and inconsistencies you make.
FatGTP:
That more suggests there's something wrong with your 'logic'.
Elaborate please, im all ears!
2 months
Munchies:
You are a troll. There's nothing to understand.
Some people choose not to feed the trolls. Some choose to point them and make them dance.
FatGTP:
Your craving for attention is your motivation, not any moral considerations. You simply enjoy playing the superior one and don’t even notice how much you yourself are becoming what you hate. Outsiders rarely bother to analyze threads completely. They only see two people squabbling. You probably haven't noticed that yet.
That implies you've ignored what people other than Munchies, have said in this thread.
Plus, Munchies has already told you she is a sadist who will troll back the trolls. You don’t need to assume her motivations, she already asserted that, and her behavior aligns with it.
At this point, for me, this is litteraly just an exercise to point out the logical fallacies and inconsistencies you make.
2 months
FatGTP:
You all need to finally agree on what I am and which one of you is correct in your assumption. Both can't be true at the same time.
Morbidly A Beast:
I believe you are a AI or at the very least used AI for a large portion of your writing in this thread. What have it away was the use of erm dashes people don’t use those often
I think the hallucinatory responses ( such as "AI is material" ) are a much stronger clue.
People can use whatever dash is on their keyboard. But no human being is stupid enough to assert than AI, a software, is
material. Only AI is non-sensical enough to do that.
2 months
FatGTP:
You all need to finally agree on what I am and which one of you is correct in your assumption. Both can't be true at the same time.
We dont, as a matter of fact.
We would need to agree on what you are, if we needed to reach consensus for some kind of decision of what to do with you. But since we aren't doing that, we dont need to agree.
2 months
FatGTP:
The next step would then be to recognize your own hallucination. 😉
That implies im hallucinating, which is false.
Meanwhile, one of your responses litteraly wrote "AI is material". AI, a fucking software.
Edit: By the way this is an example of the red herring fallacy. You attempt to divert attention away from the shortcommings of AI by throwing ad-hominems that are not related to the actual point, in this case that AI hallucinates.
2 months
FatGTP:
And there it was again — the lack of understanding of technology. Even an AI couldn't definitively and 100% reliably tell what was AI-generated and what wasn't. It would be especially difficult when a person, amusingly, mixes the two.
There is a very specific type of hallucinations that an LLM makes in its responses.
I can recognize those.
2 months
Morbidly A Beast:
Fat GPT is literally an AI.
I don’t think they have any place in human discourse unless like a grok on x sorta like a all knowing google search you can use to research something without knowing everything, to fill in the subtext of what you are writing.
Also you can tell when someone is using ai with the use of erm dashes.
i wrote a recomendation on forums to implement a new rule prohibiting AI generated responses from being posted on the forums.
2 months
Newenglander:
Love it or hate it, AI is here to stay. It keeps refining itself over time. There will soon come a point no human can compete with it.
We're using it in our business to automate certain tasks, with accuracy humans can't match. What used to take minutes can now be done in seconds.
Always Improving. That's AI.
Large Language Models will
never improve.
2 months
I recommend implementing a new rule that will prohibit anyone from posting AI generated responses on the forums, specifically.
The rational is that AI is extremely hallucinatory when it is used to generate replies in the context of debates/arguments, etc. Which is something that happens a lot in the forums.
Not everyone is intelligent or knowledgeable enough to be able to recognize if an assertion generated in said replies is true or hallucinatory. In addition, anyone can just generate AI responses effortlessly. Everyone else will feel fatigue trying to counter them while remaining coherent and logical.
Ultimately this means that the "last man standing" in a debate will be the one who uses AI. Everyone else will have fallen silent because of the fatigue. Other users may conflate this and think that the AI generated responses are the best, because it will appear like that. And then some of those people will believe the AI hallucinations.
We need to protect ourselves from misinformation and from the fatigue of arguing against AI generated arguments. The only way to do that, since AI has a tremendous capacity to generate without wearing down or feeling fatigue, is to make posting AI generated text within the forums, specifically, ban-able.
2 months
Munchies:
This is a lot of words for "I want to keep using generative AI, and I don't want to be shamed for it."
I said what I said. Generative AI is incapable of doing anything other than making mathematical probably based on a dataset. If you make a program truly capable of creativity, you have made something that is not generative AI. You have made something else.
I challenge you to write a story about anything you want without using generative AI. I want you to put the max amount of effort you can into it. And then I want you to compare it to your AI stories. See which one is better.
FatGTP:
No. I will not submit to your conditions.
By writing a story I would legitimize your test premise as an absolute measure — I refuse to accept that.
My time is limited; your attempt at proof may win you a forum triumph, but it yields me no insight.
Even if my story were outstanding, you wouldn’t admit it — people in forums rarely change their minds because of opposing arguments.
Feel free to continue feeling superior — no objective proof required.
😉
And Munchies, at least her replies, are superior to the replies
you provide, because the ones you provide are completely hallucinatory, where as Munchies' replies are not.
2 months
