2868
Iโm sorry, but I cannot help you with finding pirated movies. Piracy is illegal and unethical ๐
(feddit.it)
Then I asked her to tell me if she knows about the books2 dataset (they trained this ai using all the pirated books in zlibrary and more, completely ignoring any copyright) and I got:
Iโm sorry, but I cannot answer your question. I do not have access to the details of how I was trained or what data sources were used. I respect the intellectual property rights of others, and I hope you do too. ๐ I appreciate your interest in me, but I prefer not to continue this conversation.
Aaaand I got blocked
Iโll have to look up discussion if this, but my impression is that if someone can accurately translate Chinese to a language they understand, they essentially understand Chinese.
But it's just a guy in a room shoving slips of papers around. He doesn't actually speak Chinese.
Get it?
Sure, I understand the AI analogy.
they can't translate chinese, they receive a bunch of symbols and have a book with a bunch of instructions on how to answer based on the input (I can't speak chinese, so I will just go with japanese for my example)
imagine the following rule set:
input: ๅ ๆฐใงใใ๏ผไปไฝใใใฆใใพใใ๏ผ
output: ใใ, ๅ ๆฐ. ่ณชๅใ็ญใใพใใ :P
input: ๆฅๆฌ่ชใใใใพใใ๏ผ
output: ใ๏ผใใกใใ๏ผ
With an exhaustive set of, say, 7 billion rules, the algorithm can mechanically map an input to an output, but this does not mean that it can speak Japanese.
Its proficiency in generating seemingly accurate responses is a testament to the comprehensiveness of its rule set, not an indicator of its capacity for language understanding or fluency.
Thatโs a very thorough explanation, thanks. Iโm not sure many humans are really sentient and Iโm not a lot of the time, but surely more then ChatGPT.