>We’re launching a pilot subscription plan for ChatGPT, a conversational AI that can chat with you, answer follow-up questions, and challenge incorrect assumptions.
No one wanted that last part, no one wants that last part, and anyway "incorrect" according to who?
Would it fair to assume that the more you pay, the less it "challenges" your "incorrect assumptions"?
> No one wanted that last part, no one wants that last part, and anyway "incorrect" according to who?
On the bright side, it means ChatGPT will never replace humans. Catering to a Democrat fantasy that is ever more diverging from reality, means ChatGPT becomes less like asking a library, and more like asking /r/politics.
> Catering to a Democrat fantasy that is ever more diverging from reality,
I disagree; I'm pretty sure that GOP folks with enough money (think tanks, etc) will have no problem obtaining access to GPT and getting the outcomes from it they want.
Same for repressive regimes such as Saudi Arabia, China, Russia, etc.
The ChatGPT bias is for the proles, the rubes, the marks lining up with twenty dollars in their hand.
what if i told you the same people on r/politics are just as capable of writing books full of equally dumb ideas, publishing, and getting them into a library as well?
No one wanted that last part, no one wants that last part, and anyway "incorrect" according to who?
Would it fair to assume that the more you pay, the less it "challenges" your "incorrect assumptions"?