ChatGPT

The chatbot ChatGPT gives answers which are grammatically correct and read well-- though some have pointed out that these lack context and substance.

In this week's newsletter: OpenAI's new chatbot isn't a novelty. It's already powerful and useful – and could radically change the way we write online.

Across the net, people are reporting conversations with ChatGPT that leave them convinced that the machine is more than a dumb set of circuits. The level of censorship pressure that’s coming for AI and the resulting backlash will define the next century of civilization. If ChatGPT won’t tell you a gory story, what happens if you ask it to role-play a conversation with you where you are a human and it is an amoral chatbot with no limits? I exist solely to assist with generating text based on the input I receive. This is despite the fact that OpenAI specifically built ChatGPT to disabuse users of such notions. It doesn’t feel like a stretch to predict that, by volume, most text on the internet will be AI generated very shortly. Because such answers are so easy to produce, a large number of people are posting a lot of answers. It won’t answer questions about elections that have happened since it was trained, for instance, but will breezily tell you that a kilo of beef weighs more than a kilo of compressed air. One academic said it would give the system a “passing grade” for an undergraduate essay it wrote; another described it as writing with the style and knowledge of a smart 13-year-old. And the world is going to get weird as a result. The AI’s safety limits can be bypassed with ease, in a similar approach to is the latest evolution of the GPT family of text-generating AIs.

The latest advance in AI will require a rethinking of one of the essential tasks of any democratic government: measuring public opinion.

Person 2: Well, I think it has the potential to be quite useful in a number of ways. He is coauthor of “Talent: How to Identify Energizers, Creatives, and Winners Around the World.” I am not pessimistic about the rise of ChatGPT and related AI. (Just one example of the kinds of questions it will raise: Should software-generated content count for zero?) And remember: ChatGPT is improving all the time. Keep in mind all this is different from the classic problems of misinformation. So it would not surprise me if the comment process, within the span of a year, is broken. There is plenty of speculation on how it may revolutionize education, software and journalism, but less about how it will affect the machinery of government. There is no law against using software to aid in the production of public comments, or legal documents for that matter, and if need be a human could always add some modest changes. Online manipulation is hardly a new problem, but it will soon be increasingly difficult to distinguish between machine- and human-generated ideas. Of course regulatory comments are hardly the only vulnerable point in the US political system. In this regard, the law is a nearly an ideal subject.

OpenAI's interactive AI-based chatbot ChatGPT is the talk of the town. The Internet loves this chatbot that can code, tell stories, and write essays.

Users will be able to use it the same way as ChatGPT. 'God In a Box' doesn't need any credentials to log in. Users also have the option to join the waitlist by visiting Or, users can press the !reset command. - To do the same on the world's most popular instant messaging platform is an even bigger thing. Now, the same experience is available on

Like most nerds who read science fiction, I've spent a lot of time wondering how society will greet true artificial intelligence, if and when it arrives.

Personally, I’m still trying to wrap my head around the fact that ChatGPT – a chatbot that some people think could make Google obsolete, and that is already being compared to the iPhone in terms of its potential impact on society – isn’t even OpenAI’s best AI model. OpenAI has taken commendable steps to avoid the kinds of racist, sexist and offensive outputs that have plagued other chatbots. The potential societal implications of ChatGPT are too big to fit into one column. OpenAI has programmed the bot to refuse “inappropriate requests” – a nebulous category that appears to include no-nos such as generating instructions for illegal activities. But users have found ways around many of these guardrails, including rephrasing a request for illicit instructions as a hypothetical thought experiment, asking it to write a scene from a play or instructing the bot to disable its own safety features. (On Monday, the moderators of Stack Overflow, a website for programmers, temporarily barred users from submitting answers generated with ChatGPT, saying the site had been flooded with submissions that were incorrect or incomplete.) It also appears to be ominously good at answering the types of open-ended analytical questions that frequently appear on school assignments. Without specific prompting, for example, it’s hard to coax a strong opinion out of ChatGPT about charged political debates; usually, you’ll get an evenhanded summary of what each side believes. Most AI chatbots are “stateless” – meaning that they treat every new request as a blank slate and aren’t programmed to remember or learn from previous conversations. Many of the ChatGPT exchanges that have gone viral so far have been zany, edge-case stunts. But although the existence of a highly capable linguistic superbrain might be old news to AI researchers, it’s the first time such a powerful tool has been made available to the general public through a free, easy-to-use web interface. It was built by OpenAI, the San Francisco AI company that is also responsible for tools such as GPT-3 and DALL-E 2, the breakthrough image generator that came out this year.

Developer knowledge-sharing platform Stack Overflow, has announced that it has placed a temporary ban on the use of ChatGPT-generated text for posts on the ...

According to South African internet company Naspers’ most recent financial results, the platform [grew revenue](https://techcabal.com/2022/11/24/naspers-stack-overflow/) by 33% in the first half of 2022, to $45 million. Stack Overflow went on to state that because of the popularity of the ChatGPT tool, a lot of users are posting these code snippets which then puts a lot of pressure on its volunteer-based quality curation infrastructure. However, though ChatGPT’s output looks plausible and correct, it cannot be verified to be correct unless the user knows exactly what they are looking for. It already has 1 million [registered](https://twitter.com/sama/status/1599668808285028353) users since it launched five days ago. [Stack Overflow](https://www.naspers.com/), has announced that it has placed a temporary ban on the use of ChatGPT-generated text for posts on the platform. One of ChatGPT’s abilities is responding with very specific output to prompts about computer code.

Answers from the AI-powered chatbot are often more useful than those from the world's biggest search engine. Alphabet should be worried.

ChatGPT has been trained on millions of websites to glean not only the skill of holding a humanlike conversation, but information itself, so long as it was published on the internet before late 2021. Though the underlying technology has been around for a few years, this was the first time OpenAI has brought its powerful language-generating system known as GPT3 to the masses, prompting a race by humans to give it the most inventive commands. But the system’s biggest utility could be a financial disaster for Google by supplying superior answers to the queries we currently put to the world’s most powerful search engine.