ogre?

I've been hearing quite a lot about this new app, ChatGPT. In case you didn't know, it's a new thing that uses Arficial Intelligence to write arcles, answer quesons and have conversaons with. I'm not sure how I feel about the need for this. Aerall, there are a plethora of ways to hold a conversaon with someone, the best of course is down the pub with a pint in your hand. I, like many of you have had the most profound and wide ranging conversaons with people I've met over a good glass of red (even a bad glass of red for that maer). I've discussed the life expectancy of and ant, what alternave use there could be for many inanimate objects as well as world peace and what the inventor of the pogo sck was actually trying to invent. My life has been enhanced by inane and serious conversaons with real people from all sorts of back grounds and so I find it difficult to understand how typing in silence to an AI robot could aid anyone. Surely, the whole point of having a conversaon is to use voice. In fact, there is so much more to a conversaon than speaking. We watch the other person for signs of pleasure or anger in what we are saying. We hear tone that helps us understand, and we react instantly to what is being said. We don't get up halfway through a meeng to get a cuppa so we can think of our reply.

I understand that some people don't have anyone to talk to, but there are a million and one chat rooms that they can join so it sort of negates the need for this on the conversaon front.

Google has all the answers to every queson I could possibly think of asking. While I do accept that the internet is full of lies and conspiracies, I'm prey sure that if I asked Google to tell me the Kings of England in order of appearance, I can prey much rely on the answer to be truthful. Incidentally, I have asked ChatGPT what some alternave uses for a cucumber might be, and the six answers it gave didn't have the one I thought about, I need to have a serious conversaon with myself.

You would be right in thinking that my interest in this was pricked by its ability to dra arcles, mainly because I am at heart a lazy bugger and thought I might be able to get it to do this for me. Everything I asked it to write about lacked something. I said write me a funny arcle about ChatGPT, it wasn't funny. I asked it to write an arcle about rugby, it was meh. By the me I'd put my forth request in I realised the problem.

It wasn't me, this bot has no personality, it's been programmed to learn, so I suspect that the more I play with it, the more it will know me, but how can it?

How can it understand the nuances of Nicky's mind. How I think, what I feel, how I convey my thoughts and feelings in the way that I write. Only I have lived my life so only I can write the arcles I write.

I know a few teachers who are concerned that a some kids will use this tool rather than pung in the work themselves, it's an absolute certainty that a few will try, but I would say that the difference would be obvious in many cases, there is nothing human about it, If lile Jonny used this, I feel the teacher who knows him will be able to tell it wasn't him.

I also think that anyone who offers this as there own would be crossing the lines of plagiarism; if I offered the work done by this bot as my own, surely it would be classed as such. I have recently read that there are some folk out there that have fallen in love with this thing, much like the peeps that have married their cats or the Eiffel Tower. Whilst it does have a bit more to it than half the men on most dang apps but I really can't see the aracon myself. Perhaps I should grab a bole of red and sck with it.