Re: Aw: Re: AI-based writing assistants

[Peter Neilson <neilson -at- windstream -dot- net>]

I find that it's fun to try to push ChatGPT's boundaries, but the thing 
is very vanilla, very predictable, and usually quite boring. A 
conversation with an eight-year-old child is more fun and more 
rewarding. The child will ask questions about my horses, good ones, 
sometimes even getting into topics where I feel uncomfortable giving a 
full answer.

For amusement, I just asked ChatGPT how much it would cost to buy a 
horse. I got an answer that was factually on target, but hardly as 
useful as the answer I always give when asked that question. Years ago, 
I would spell out all the costs of ownership. Now I simply reply with 
another question: "How much does it cost to get married?"

To its credit the bot did say, "Ongoing expenses such as boarding, feed, 
veterinary care, farrier services, and equipment can add significantly 
to the overall cost of horse ownership." It missed the opportunity to 
suggest that the costs almost invariably swamp the initial purchase 
price, or that the potential buyer may be a stars-in-the-eyes idiot.

There is a tendency of horse owners to base their estimates of their own 
horse's value on the amount that's been spent on training, feed, and 
emergency veterinary care. Sunk cost fallacy.

My favorite use for ChatGPT remains my attempts to get it to create 
worse poetry than McGonagall.

On 6/9/23 08:39, Slager Timothy J wrote: