Don’t encourage it. 
Thinking. . . so old school. Maybe it will become an anachronism.
Could this be an attempt by the establishment to make anything you read on the internet void ?
There are so many people attacking the establishment with theories that could or could not be true. What if all the facts gathered from say Wiki, are neutralised and cancelled out because nobody can ascertain what is true and what is not?..
hasn’t that already happened? I’m not sure what happens these days as wiki took some control about ten years ago, but in the old days wiki was a battleground between geeks in basements, who would edit and sub edit entries. These days you have to wonder whether they are using AI to check the script. We will end up with a “the machine stops” scenario.
2 Likes
Apparently, Wiki has been using AI since at least 2018:
The Wikipedia community, the free encyclopedia that is built from a model of openly editable content, is notorious for its toxicity. The issue was so bad that the number of active contributors or editors—those that made one edit per month—had fallen by 40 percent during an eight-year period. Even though there’s not one solution to combat this issue, Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit that supports Wikipedia, decided to use artificial intelligence to learn more about the problem and consider ways to combat it, including:
Collaboration between Wikimedia Foundation and Jigsaw (formerly known as Google Ideas) to Stop Abusive Comments
Objective Revision Evaluation Service (ORES System)
AI to Write Wikipedia Articles (then underway)
Wiki says:
2 Likes
I guess this forum site does the same. There will come a time when you won’t be able to tell whether you are chatting on line with a real human being or a bot.
1 Like
I don’t think that will happen on this site but it probably will on Azz’s next creation … 
I thought I would try ChatGPT, just to see what all the fuss is about and I had a number of things I wanted to try, just to see what happens.
However, I had a serious problem with it. I created an account, whilst insisting on giving my phone number, I was then directed to a page where I saw a subscription fee of $7.99 to use it. For some inexplicable reason, my mouse accidentally went to the top of the page and clicked the little X where I quit the site.
So I’m now wondering if this all-powerful AI ChatGPT knows what I mean by “Sticking it where the sun doesn’t shine”.
I downloaded the free version to both my phone and my notebook completely free of charge and without any hassle. It’s the one whose database stops in 2019 if I’m not mistaken.
Extracts:
It’s a chatbot that responds to almost any prompt, be it a question or command, in convincingly legible prose. GPT stands for Generative Pre-trained Transformer, which means it’s a tool that can generate responses based on what it’s already learned. It is a paid-for tool but there is a free version that you can use if the service isn’t too busy.
The free version of ChatGPT is based on data collection that finished in early 2022, so it does not ‘know’ anything about the world after that time. There’s also a premium version called ChatGPT Plus (which costs $20 a month) that’s furnished with more up-to-date information from GPT-4.
Can I trust the information I get from ChatGPT?
In short, no. ChatGPT can be used in a way that can help get you started and find information that you weren’t aware of. The main thing here is to not use a chatbot as your primary source for information, but instead take the answers it gives you and pursue them until you have found the real facts.
It’s important to understand how ChatGPT comes up with its answers. ChatGPT is very good at placing one word after another. As such, it does not ‘know’ anything at all; all it can do is put words one after another that make sense.
It’s often accurate but equally it can write utter nonsense. The tone ChatGPT uses does not leave any room for doubt, even if it’s talking rubbish and stating facts that are patently false.
If you attempt to probe into how it knows what it’s told you – for instance by asking for a list of citations – it will simply produce a list of things that look like citations but may not actually be real references at all.
Anyone can use ChatGPT for themselves - visit the website, sign up and start experimenting. ChatGPT is a language model, so it can’t generate art or images like some AI engines. However, it can in theory process images and make recommendations. For example, it could scan an image of what’s left in your fridge and then recommend a recipe for dinner.
At your own risk … 
1 Like
UK schools have been left confused by the fast rate of change in artificial intelligence (AI) and its impact on education, head teachers are warning.
In a letter to the Times, educators from the state and private sector say developments are “bewildering”. They are launching a body of experts to advise schools on which areas are “beneficial, and which are damaging”.
The technology is moving “far too quickly” for government alone to give adequate advice to schools, they say. AI is the “greatest threat but also potentially the greatest benefit to our students, staff and schools”, the teachers, led by Sir Anthony Seldon, the headteacher of Epsom College, say in the letter.
The group has also questioned the role of digital companies behind AI. “We have no confidence that the large digital companies will be capable of regulating themselves in the interests of students, staff and schools” their letter reads.
Concerns have quickly grown in recent months over AI with the prominence of the ChatGPT bot which has passed exams.
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak recently said that regulation had to evolve at the same time rapid changes are made in AI. He said “guardrails” should be put in place to maximise the benefits of AI while minimising the risks to society.
The group of educators said it was pleased the government was “grasping the nettle” on the issue but felt the need to set up its own body composed of leading teachers “guided by a panel of independent digital and AI experts”.
As with all things technological, kids, who are early users, understand it better then their elders, who are usually latecomers.
1 Like
I don’t have a ChatGPT account myself but I was looking for some specific information online this week and had drawn a blank. I kept re-phrasing my question in my browser search engines but kept getting only links to general info on the topic but not the kind of information I was looking for.
I mentioned to a colleague that I couldn’t find the info we needed for a project we are working on. She is a teacher and uses ChatGPT at school, so she used it to ask my question and found what I had spent hours looking for. Within a minute she had forwarded me a list containing the specific info I was looking for. It’s saved me a lot of time and effort.
I was very impressed.
1 Like
On Reddit, I’ve seen people who say they are lawyers and IT professionals who use ChatGPT in their jobs. They say it would take them a lot longer if they had to look up the info themselves.
To repeat the previously issued warning:
Someone needs to tell the lawyers and IT professionals. From what I’ve seen, there are quite a number of them.
IMO, anyone who relies on unverified ChatGPT responses is, by implication, someone who is looking for a short-cut and, therefore, someone who is unreliable.
If “lawyers and IT professionals” choose the AI source only then they surely will, at some point, be challenged.
Well, that was quick. And so sad. 
. Not for the attorney but for anyone who thought this wouldn’t happen this quickly.
I didn’t think it would be this bad.
Lawyer is facing a disciplinary hearing for relying on chatGPT because he didn’t know it could give false information.
Yes, that is exactly what I found it really useful for - the ChatBot answered my specific question with a list of points to consider, with references to legislation and professional body rules, which I could use to start the research and fact finding I needed to do.
Anyone doing research for anything should be aware that one shouldn’t just grab at the first bit of online info without cross-checking it for accuracy by looking further into it and checking back to the original source.
That’s just common sense.
Now it’s been asked to do the A-level final exam and it passed with a B. Last year it was lower.
The whole exam system is becoming a farce and will be worthless in the future.