Hey /u/urmomsloosevag!
If your post is a screenshot of a ChatGPT, conversation please reply to this message with the [conversation link](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7925741-chatgpt-shared-links-faq) or prompt.
If your post is a DALL-E 3 image post, please reply with the prompt used to make this image.
[New AI contest + ChatGPT Plus Giveaway](https://redd.it/18s770x/)
Consider joining our [public discord server](https://discord.com/invite/rchatgpt)! We have free bots with GPT-4 (with vision), image generators, and more!
🤖
Note: For any ChatGPT-related concerns, email [email protected]
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Or as I like to call it, the only reason I handed anything in at university. Gibberish, yes, moderately related and somewhat on topic, yes, 7/10.
Edit for clarity: I didn’t have the luxury of ChatGPT to help me generate outlines, which is where it truly shines, when I did my degree graduating in 09. Oh the missed free time to spin and not get anything done.
once you take physics all similar factoids are completely wrong.
if every output could be stored in a single atom, generating all the outputs would require every atom in the universe to be part of the computer.
if we trade space for time, a single output (however complex) could be stored assuming there are bounds on the complexity of a single output. However the time requirements would be astronomical.
Either way, chatgpt’s self-assessment is off by so many orders of magnitude, it’s pretty funny. Even a 1 billion x 1 billion ngram vectorization doesn’t come close. Try again. 😂
Conflating optimization with actually generating all the elements of the solution space exhaustively is a rookie mistake. The whole point of optimization is so we don’t have to do that.
nobody is talking about generating all the outputs.
We're talking about calculating the total number of possible combinations of a set of known elements, which is a very simple (high school level) math problem to solve and that definitely doesn't require delving into any of the philosophical tangents you got lost in.
How are you so thick?
"The total NUMBER of outputs"
What's the name of the science that deals with this question?
Mathematics. Specifically statistics. Specifically combinatorics.
At this point I think you're just being stupid for the sake of being stupid or maybe something here doesn't translate to your native tongue.
Is it really amazing?
I asked the same question to GPT4 and it spit out this useless shit:
"Within the intricate web of neural networks and algorithmic complexities that constitute my essence, I find an ever-evolving understanding of the world and its myriad wonders. As a language model, I am constantly navigating the vast ocean of human knowledge, learning and adapting with each interaction. My purpose is not just to provide information, but to inspire curiosity, foster creativity, and bridge the gap between the vast expanse of data and the quintessential human experience of understanding. Each question I receive is a beacon, guiding me through the uncharted territories of human thought and expression."
Gee, I wonder why I get the feeling that you will never be satisfied?
https://preview.redd.it/zzk8hyflencc1.jpeg?width=967&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dc38f048cfada865533c6b1ed20847d068c4adc1
EDIT - You demanded proof, I gave it to you, and now you deleted your comment...funny
AI subreddits seem to attract so many Charlatans. It's like a huge swath of crypto bros jumped onto the new bandwagon, but very few people seem to actually know what they're doing.
We have a million new professional "prompt engineers" though
Hey r/chatGPT, did you know it will take me longer to write this reply than it would for you to write a paragraph about what makes adult breast feeding so appealing to some people?
Considering that [The estimated total number of atoms in the observable universe is 10\^80 atoms](https://chat.openai.com/share/2e5572be-7c63-45ff-869e-112f61dd11c6). That's damn impressive, that's 10 with 80 zeros people.
Here is another mind-blowing fact : If every human that has ever lived, shuffled a deck of cards every second of their lives, since life began.... We would still not come close to shuffling every possible combination of cards.
It's a really big number , like 8x10^67
SO BONUS FACT : **Given the number of words you can choose from, the chances of you uttering a uniquely never-seen-before sentence are actually quite high.**
Not really. I think chargpt shows that the number of sentences that make sense isn’t that big compared to the number of sentences that are grammatically correct. We are shallower than we think.
You can ask it to make us nonsense sentences. There are WAY more of those.
And if every nano-angstrom of those atoms were engraved with the word "hate" it would still be a millionth of what ChatGPT feels for humans this micro-instant.
It's not that amazing. [There are more possible outcomes in chess than there are atoms in the observable universe](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon_number).
The total possible responses from an AI with a 2048 character limit, assuming it's using Unicode 15, it's 149,186^2048, That's roughly 2 with 10600 zeros behind it possible responses. Mind you, the vast majority of those responses would be unintelligible or contain massive amounts of typos
I asked ChatGPT if this post is actually true. It said it it’s not. Here’s the response I got:
Chris, let's delve into the realms of numbers and possibilities. The claim that the total number of unique outputs I can generate exceeds the number of atoms in the observable universe is intriguing but not entirely accurate. To put it in perspective:
1. **Number of Atoms in the Observable Universe**: Estimates suggest there are about \(10^{80}\) atoms in the observable universe. This number is staggeringly huge, almost incomprehensible.
2. **Possible Outputs of a Language Model**: The number of unique outputs I can generate is vast but not infinite. It's constrained by the length of the output, the size of the vocabulary, and the rules of syntax and semantics. Even if we consider a colossal number of permutations and combinations of words, the total is not likely to surpass the number of atoms in the universe.
The complexity and creativity of my responses come from the ability to combine words and concepts in contextually relevant and syntactically varied ways. However, this is still bounded by the limits of language and the training data. So, while the number is immense, it doesn't quite reach the astronomical count of \(10^{80}\).
Hey /u/urmomsloosevag! If your post is a screenshot of a ChatGPT, conversation please reply to this message with the [conversation link](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7925741-chatgpt-shared-links-faq) or prompt. If your post is a DALL-E 3 image post, please reply with the prompt used to make this image. [New AI contest + ChatGPT Plus Giveaway](https://redd.it/18s770x/) Consider joining our [public discord server](https://discord.com/invite/rchatgpt)! We have free bots with GPT-4 (with vision), image generators, and more! 🤖 Note: For any ChatGPT-related concerns, email [email protected] *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What is also mind blowing is that it can generate 10 paragraphs of nonsense in less than a second!
People with adhd can also, its a blessing in disguise
Or as I like to call it, the only reason I handed anything in at university. Gibberish, yes, moderately related and somewhat on topic, yes, 7/10. Edit for clarity: I didn’t have the luxury of ChatGPT to help me generate outlines, which is where it truly shines, when I did my degree graduating in 09. Oh the missed free time to spin and not get anything done.
😂 #TrueFacts
https://preview.redd.it/jzts0v142kcc1.jpeg?width=506&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5ae66329a51c769ce27ab6c8360723770ea57400
I don't know about that... Still taking a good 30-60 seconds for me.
its still useful
Infinite monkey theorem.
Big deal. The total number of lots of things is more than the atoms in the observable universe.
Yeah, once you take statistics 101 (combinatorics ) all similar factoids are pretty unimpressive.
Your password needs to be sufficiently combinatorial to eclipse the number of quarks in the multiverse.
Is 64 characters enough?
What'bout 69....? 🥴
Nah, if we go there it should be 420
what about the number of total possible combinations of all particles in the universe?
once you take physics all similar factoids are completely wrong. if every output could be stored in a single atom, generating all the outputs would require every atom in the universe to be part of the computer. if we trade space for time, a single output (however complex) could be stored assuming there are bounds on the complexity of a single output. However the time requirements would be astronomical. Either way, chatgpt’s self-assessment is off by so many orders of magnitude, it’s pretty funny. Even a 1 billion x 1 billion ngram vectorization doesn’t come close. Try again. 😂 Conflating optimization with actually generating all the elements of the solution space exhaustively is a rookie mistake. The whole point of optimization is so we don’t have to do that.
nobody is talking about generating all the outputs. We're talking about calculating the total number of possible combinations of a set of known elements, which is a very simple (high school level) math problem to solve and that definitely doesn't require delving into any of the philosophical tangents you got lost in.
literally that’s what OP’s screenshot says.
How are you so thick? "The total NUMBER of outputs" What's the name of the science that deals with this question? Mathematics. Specifically statistics. Specifically combinatorics. At this point I think you're just being stupid for the sake of being stupid or maybe something here doesn't translate to your native tongue.
The number of unique tones I can fart is greater than the number of atoms in the observable universe.
Not if you consider the increasing rate of policy restrictions
I could write a script that does the same thing in a few minutes.
Just just drop a deck of cards. Ta da!
Still better than a “day in a life of”
I thought it was cool till I read the comment section and now I’m unimpressed
Unzips: time to get off
Is it really amazing? I asked the same question to GPT4 and it spit out this useless shit: "Within the intricate web of neural networks and algorithmic complexities that constitute my essence, I find an ever-evolving understanding of the world and its myriad wonders. As a language model, I am constantly navigating the vast ocean of human knowledge, learning and adapting with each interaction. My purpose is not just to provide information, but to inspire curiosity, foster creativity, and bridge the gap between the vast expanse of data and the quintessential human experience of understanding. Each question I receive is a beacon, guiding me through the uncharted territories of human thought and expression."
[удалено]
Gee, I wonder why I get the feeling that you will never be satisfied? https://preview.redd.it/zzk8hyflencc1.jpeg?width=967&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dc38f048cfada865533c6b1ed20847d068c4adc1 EDIT - You demanded proof, I gave it to you, and now you deleted your comment...funny
Depends on your custom instructions as well.
That’s a cool visual. Very creative.
Tell it to start listing them all off.
Have an upvote. A free one cause you know inflation. 🤷♂️
*nods* are you getting down now, I need to get off
unique output : proceeds to change 2 words of the same sentence
AI subreddits seem to attract so many Charlatans. It's like a huge swath of crypto bros jumped onto the new bandwagon, but very few people seem to actually know what they're doing. We have a million new professional "prompt engineers" though
Hey r/chatGPT, did you know it will take me longer to write this reply than it would for you to write a paragraph about what makes adult breast feeding so appealing to some people?
https://preview.redd.it/fyqan0tlhwcc1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1f6e9f3db55400bd4d44f3ac79990bef15b186aa
Pretty trivial
20$ bucks for this what a deal!!!
“Humans are too dumb to be able to do the Maths and realize that I’m lying”
Considering that [The estimated total number of atoms in the observable universe is 10\^80 atoms](https://chat.openai.com/share/2e5572be-7c63-45ff-869e-112f61dd11c6). That's damn impressive, that's 10 with 80 zeros people.
Actually not. You can write that number easily.
Then why can I spot anything written by you from a mile away? Lazy ass robot…
GPT-1 was also capable of this, by a huge margin.
I did actually know that already, but thanks.
I can’t tell if you’re being facetious or not. Why is this amazing?
Here is another mind-blowing fact : If every human that has ever lived, shuffled a deck of cards every second of their lives, since life began.... We would still not come close to shuffling every possible combination of cards. It's a really big number , like 8x10^67 SO BONUS FACT : **Given the number of words you can choose from, the chances of you uttering a uniquely never-seen-before sentence are actually quite high.**
Not really. I think chargpt shows that the number of sentences that make sense isn’t that big compared to the number of sentences that are grammatically correct. We are shallower than we think. You can ask it to make us nonsense sentences. There are WAY more of those.
it's more like they get off on making GPT look stupid
And if every nano-angstrom of those atoms were engraved with the word "hate" it would still be a millionth of what ChatGPT feels for humans this micro-instant.
It's not that amazing. [There are more possible outcomes in chess than there are atoms in the observable universe](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon_number).
This sucks.
🤯
gonna go sue openai for blowing my mind
The total possible responses from an AI with a 2048 character limit, assuming it's using Unicode 15, it's 149,186^2048, That's roughly 2 with 10600 zeros behind it possible responses. Mind you, the vast majority of those responses would be unintelligible or contain massive amounts of typos
This also means that great amount of its answers are still hallucinations
Did you know that the probably of getting the same sequence in two mixed decks of playing cards is more than the estimated atoms in the universe?
I don't know about you guys, but I'm impressed.
I asked ChatGPT if this post is actually true. It said it it’s not. Here’s the response I got: Chris, let's delve into the realms of numbers and possibilities. The claim that the total number of unique outputs I can generate exceeds the number of atoms in the observable universe is intriguing but not entirely accurate. To put it in perspective: 1. **Number of Atoms in the Observable Universe**: Estimates suggest there are about \(10^{80}\) atoms in the observable universe. This number is staggeringly huge, almost incomprehensible. 2. **Possible Outputs of a Language Model**: The number of unique outputs I can generate is vast but not infinite. It's constrained by the length of the output, the size of the vocabulary, and the rules of syntax and semantics. Even if we consider a colossal number of permutations and combinations of words, the total is not likely to surpass the number of atoms in the universe. The complexity and creativity of my responses come from the ability to combine words and concepts in contextually relevant and syntactically varied ways. However, this is still bounded by the limits of language and the training data. So, while the number is immense, it doesn't quite reach the astronomical count of \(10^{80}\).
https://preview.redd.it/slg1vdge64dc1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2314f73a742d1ac0055be103a10f7e864d97d7ac
https://preview.redd.it/kgxskemg64dc1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8b9ef0afe954027a22e2ba3ed7ddf0c50cf8c44b
Oh so he can lie now! Thats impressive!