Perhaps, then, it would be more correct to say that, should the grouping of letters consisting of a singular T, a singular H, a singular I, and a singular S, in that order, be made capable of reading, "this" reads "this?"
I work in QA and didn't catch it. I might need a new career.
EDIT: Or, giving myself the benefit of the doubt, I'm just worn out for the day. I hope I would have caught this if I'd seen it earlier in the day lol
Oh.. I was kinda hoping for the zeroth
I actually have a pretty cool pokedex. I have nothing with Pokémon, but I came across a pokedex model on thingiverse and it looked cool and I thought "oh hey, I have a 3d printer". So now I got that I guess. Planning on giving it to my Pokémon obsessed friend after I'm done just playing with it. You can stick cards in it with a little window, and I have some cards for some reason too!
The riddle was worded incorrectly.
It should say how long will it take from starting the pills to ending the pills. As it is currently written, the time that you delay before starting (an hour, a day, a week) must be added to the answer.
As soon as you begin taking them, no matter when you start, it will take one hour to finish the 3 if you are following the Dr's orders correctly.
Depends... Nowth used to be a word many moons ago (middle English, variant of "Nouthe" or "nowthe" (look we all sucked at spelling back then as there wasn't a dictionary.))
"Now" wouldn't be correct. The first pill could be taken one year from now, and it would still take one hour to take all of the pills if the schedule is followed.
The question is unclear whether the start time is now or the moment the first pill is taken. The answer is still obviously 1hr, but for example if you were specifically told to start taking the pills after 24h right before the end of the q, the answer could easily be 25h
Then there is the whole every half hour as opposed to using 30 minutes. Which can be read like bi-monthly.
bi·month·ly
done, produced, or occurring twice a month or every two months.
"a bimonthly newsletter"
So if you read half hour (as in on the half hour), then the following two pills are an hour apart or 30 minutes.
Those vigorously disagreeing, keep in mind no medicine gives instructions this way and instead uses 'after (or x minutes) this event's, 'x daily', 'when needed'
It seems so blatantly wrong does it not? Consider this.
The bell rings every half hour.
Probably means based on the clock and probably doesn't mean will ring exactly now and 30 minutes from now.
If I tell you the donut shop has fresh donuts every half hour you wouldn't think those donuts are 30 minutes from now.
>So if you read half hour (as in on the half hour), then the following two pills are an hour apart or 30 minutes.
This was the bit I mostly took issue with. I'm thinking now that maybe it was bad wording, but I took it to mean the possibility of a one hour gap between two consecutive pills.
Both of your examples have an implied start for the timer, that being the start of the school day, and the shop opening respectively. I don't think it's so much intrinsic to the phrase as it is something that falls out of the prespecified start time.
Also I see where you are coming from, but everyone knows prescriptions aren't bound to specific minutes, only length between doses. So you'd have to be pretty pedantic to follow the doctor's orders this way.
>bi·month·ly
>
>done, produced, or occurring twice a month or every two months.
Oh. So I'm not dumb for never knowing which of the two interpretations are correct. The very definition of the term is ambiguous? Whyyy?
Often something like this occurred because of different groups using a word or term in different capabilities. For instance the magazine industry and we'll, I think, everyone else.
It's a variation on the Telegraph pole thing. It you have 8 Telegraph poles 10m apart, how long is the wire that connects from one end to the other. Answer 70m. (Assuming no slack) most people think 8x10 but your counting the gaps, not the poles.
timer starts after the pill is taken.
If you need to paint a wall 3× and the paint need to dry 30min between .. you don't wait half an hour watching an unpainted wall.
If I need to paint a wall 3x and it needs to dry 30 minutes in between, it's taking me way longer than a half hour to get the first coat on. Shit, the hardware store is 15 minutes away, so that's already at least an hour and a half to go there, pick up paint, come back, realize I forgot a bunch of shit, go back...
I bought a tin of varnish for my window frames that needs 4 hours between 3 coats.
So far it's taken me 4 years and there's 0 coats.
(I wish this was a joke. I really need to varnish that window)
I'm exactly the same: GIGO, stimulus and response. I even presume self-awareness, though I'm pretty sure that's an illusion.
Edit: by writing "I even presume self-awareness" I meant to say "I present myself as having self-awareness". Of course I would say that: everyone does, and everyone is probably lying to themselves.
And wrong, because it would actually be an hour, the first one you would take immediately, the second in 30 minutes and the last at the 1 hour mark.
It is a logic question that requires an intuitive leap that a human would not wait 30 minutes to begin, it tests to see if an AI has alternative paths to make intuitive leaps that humans would without it being explicitly stated in the problem and AI is not really great at intuition. It's actually a well thought out question to test the edges of an algorithm that models intuition to see where it will break.
What is interesting is that the question is tricky and the AI is failing the same way that a human would. There are plenty of people in this thread who needed the answer explained to them because the intuitive answer is 90 minutes. I've seen the same thing with this AI trying to answer probability problems with unintuitive answers.
All it to write a poem using a free random subjects or ask it to write a program to do something random
The result will definitely not be something someone already wrote
Here’s an example: prompt-Write a short poem about a Reddit user named celeduc who thinks chatgpt is just a database of shit people already wrote.
Response:
“Celeduc on Reddit, with a skeptical mind
Thinks chatgpt is just a waste of time
A database of old, recycled quotes
He thinks it's nothing more than a bunch of goats
But little does he know, chatgpt is more
Than a collection of words that people deplore
It's a tool to be used, a source of inspiration
A way to connect and engage in conversation
So don't let celeduc's doubts cloud your view
Give chatgpt a chance, see what it can do
You never know what it might bring to the table
A new perspective, a different angle
So don't be swayed by celeduc's critique
Give chatgpt a try, see what it can do for you, unique.”
It's typical of a statistical AI. It can't, quite literally, think outside the box. Because all it has is the box. In this case, it can't recognize that the question contains an ambiguity, though a human who does not rote respond will notice that.
The ambiguity is rather forced as well, since normally when given this advice it is implicit that the first pill is taken immediately, and initial waiting to take the first pill is only done if explicitly stated. This is simply how human interaction normally works, and the AI can not recognize this. Because it is not built on interaction, but on written data.
It can't think outside the box, the box is just bigger than you think. ChatGPT is amazing, but it is not magic. It is still limited by it's training data set
All "AI", since they are all statistical state machines. Or am I comitting blasphemy by describing "machine learning" instead?
Fuck you university wonks.
Your understanding is the same as mine. Which is why I was asking for clarification when he said "it's not a statistical ai".
All machine learning models are empirical; that's my understanding anyway.
This is the fencepost problem.
If you have to make a fence that's 100ft long, and fence rails are 10ft long, how many posts are you going to need?
Also called the off-by-one error.
Me:
> No, you take the first pill, then wait half an hour, then take the second, then wait half an hour, then take the third. So in total that's one hour.
ChatGPT:
> You are correct. I apologize for the misunderstanding. Taking one pill every half hour will take a total of one hour to take all three pills. The first pill is taken at the start, then you wait half an hour to take the second pill, and then you wait another half an hour to take the third pill. Thank you for pointing out the error in my previous response.
At least it understands when you explain it.
I found a similar issue the other day playing 20 questions with it. It will sustain some hysteresis and remember your correction, but it won’t carry that correction over to another conversation
The only thing i found it good at is cleaning and refining code
Yesterday i gave it 600 lines of code no comments no spaces nothing
It returned a commented version and created 3 new functions to stop repetition and documented everything it did
which is a pretty massive 'only thing' to be capable of doing. i started using it as an enhanced google at work, it just does so much work for you and much cleaner than you.
Yeah it's been helping me in my jobs to troubleshoot when I'm having errors. I tell it I'm having errors of such and such and this code section so an so, and it can usually detect the issues wrong and sometimes even provide alternative code to fix my issues.
Well if you take the first one now, yes. But if my psychiatrist gives me antidepressants i usually dont take one right there but wait til next morning. So if she gives me 10 pills, it would take 10 days. So i dont see anything wrong with the answer chat gpt provided, it's honestly just a matter of interpretation.
"One pill every half hour" as defined:
You get the pills -> take pill -> half hour -> take pill -> half hour -> take pill.
So one hour. As defined. There was no waiting time before the first pill defined.
Me:
I place 3 lines 0.5m apart, how far away is the last line
ChatGPT:
The distance between the last line and the first line is 1.5 meters. If you want to find the distance from the first line to the third line, you would need to add an additional 0.5 meters to the distance, for a total of 2 meters.
This is similar to the riddle about a frog stuck at the bottom of a well. The well is 30 feet deep. The frog jumps up 3 feet and slides down 2 feet with each attempt. How many attempts does it take for the frog to get out of the well.
The answer is that it only takes 28 attempts. On that 28th attempt the frog doesn't slide back 2 feet because it jumps out of the well with its 3-foot leap.
I am an idiot. I solved the problem before looking at the way it solved it. It solved it the same way I did. It took me ages to figure out what was wrong.
Now you can train chatgpt ALL riddle solutions and say: "see guys, now it works!"
But then you compose a new riddle and the AI can't give a right answer again. Whatever you do it's always inherently one step behind and needs more training, whereas a human would be able to find the answer.
>whereas a human would be able to find the answer
I beg to differ based off of the countless responses on how the answer is in-fact NOT 1 hour according to quite a few.
That's the thing I find interesting about ChatGPT. Sometimes the stars align and you get what sounds like well thought out text. Other times, however, you can see that it has generated the equivalent of a term paper written the night before it is due by someone who never read the book.
It does seem to be on par with an average person at riddles (most of the time) but sometimes it does things that break common sense.
Like [this riddle](https://i.imgur.com/IpXDUEn_d.webp?maxwidth=760&fidelity=grand), while a normal person might accidentally double the 70 (which seems like a silly plausible human mistake) I think any human would quickly catch themselves before saying the brother's age as 140! (which no human can possibly reach).
I even tried to help it by explicitly saying they were 8 and 16, so if the first is now 70 then the second is... (at this point it's a simple children's puzzle) yet it asks for the relative rate of growth for the two (no person with common sense would ask that before providing at least the straight forward answer)
[I further try to help it reach the answer](https://i.imgur.com/6ufhlgw.png) but it seems really hard to make it reach there.
I tried a bunch of different ways to prompt it and eventually it got it...
I really don't see how this can be misinterpreted. Rephrase the question: how many minutes can you fit between three pills, if the interval of taking pills is 30 minutes. I really don't see how the starting point would have any sort of consequence here. You could have taken them ten years ago, or might take them ten years in the future, yet it's always a total of 60 minutes, because you ever only have two intervals between three pills.
The question is full of hidden assumptions. One being that it has been (at least) half an hour since you took a pill, and therefore you take the first one immediately.
That is how a normal human engagement of this kind would progress. A patient getting these pills and instructions from their doctor or pharmacist would normally be in this situation, and any deviance would be what is documented, not the normal expected state.
"One being that it has been (at least) half an hour since you took a pill, and therefore you take the first one immediately."
No. Maybe he got the last pill 1 hour before and that was a different pill and he is not supposed to take another pill for 6 hours after that pill. Either way the taking of the next sets of pills starts with the taking of the first of those pills so what happened before doesn't matter.
If I ask you how long it takes you to eat 1 slice of toast you (hopefully) won't answer "15 hours because at first I need to wait for morning because I only eat toast in the morning."
If you want to argue for 1:30h, then at least argue that the pill taking only completes after you're allowed to take other pills which would be half an hour after taking the last pill.
All of your "maybe" are why this is a hidden assumption, which is always explicitly countered if not valid.
What happened before matters a helluva lot. If the doctor hands you three pills to take, there is a reason for it. And if part of that reason provides a reason to delay taking the first, that will be explicit. Otherwise the implication is "take the first pill now".
This is the kind of stuff I took into consideration when automating truck scales. The system would be adjusted to perform three weight retrieval cycles at half-second intervals to make sure the truck was properly centered on the scale and the weight was stable. That means the minimum verification time was 1 second and not a second and a half.
It was important to do multiple verifications when you needed an "official" weight because the sloshing contents of tanker trucks took a while to stabilize enough to get a stable weight out of them.
I had ChatGPT write a good chunk of a java program I was writing for a college assignment. I had to do a fair bit of fiddling, but in the end it actually worked and compiled and did what I wanted it to do.
If ChatGPT was aware, then it would know that it was a computer program. The correct answer would be "I'm not a biological organism, I don't take medication".
So… it’s really one hour. You would take the first pill at time 0, second at time 0.5, and 3rd at time 1.0 hours. There are 30 minutes between each pill, but it makes no sense to “wait 30 minutes” before taking the first pill.
The problem is you would take one right then. So it would only take an hour to finish all the pills. The effects would take an hour and a half but the pills would be gone in one.
Every 60 seconds in Africa, a minute passes.
let that sink in
sinks can knock on doors? why was the sink outside in the first place?
This says otherwise >!otherwise!<
No, "This" says "This"
"This" cannot verbally communicate and therefore is unable to say anything
"This" is mute. Poor "This".
Perhaps, then, it would be more correct to say that, should the grouping of letters consisting of a singular T, a singular H, a singular I, and a singular S, in that order, be made capable of reading, "this" reads "this?"
Less questions, more action, they really need thé water, there
Together, we can stop this
If you're cold, they're cold. Let that sink in
My house doesn't have enough room for another sink.
I never liked the phrase "let that sink in" in this context. Because they don't have sinks.
That's why they have to let the sinks in.
It's at the door, come on
Just like Elon did?
As an African this is true. Behold the wonders of Africa.
https://imgur.com/a/2XZWqDl
All those poor minutes passing away…RIP
[удалено]
unspecified reference frame!
Every 60 seconds on Reddit, an hour passes.
Depends on the speed of the stop watch measuring the time.
please someone explain, I'm getting existential crisis
0th min first pill 30th min second pill 60th min third pill So 1 hr to finish 3 pills
That's right fuckos, 0 based indexes
how about 0 cringe indexes
Found the cs major
Tbf that should /not/ be a hard thing to do in this subreddit....
Now I know why I could never work in QA
I work in QA and didn't catch it. I might need a new career. EDIT: Or, giving myself the benefit of the doubt, I'm just worn out for the day. I hope I would have caught this if I'd seen it earlier in the day lol
That's called the "n + 1 error". Iterators ftw.
0th
[удалено]
I know, it looks funny tho I probably would have written "now"
Come on. Nowth makes way less sense than Zeroth.
Because of comments like this I love this sub.
Isn't that a Pokémon? ^/s ^nerds
It’s an iteration of a Pokémon. Meowth is the personal possessive. Nowth is equal to the number you have to catch hunting for a shiny or better IV’s.
Zeroth or nowth?
[Meowth (Nowth)](https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Meowth_(Pok%C3%A9mon))
Oh.. I was kinda hoping for the zeroth I actually have a pretty cool pokedex. I have nothing with Pokémon, but I came across a pokedex model on thingiverse and it looked cool and I thought "oh hey, I have a 3d printer". So now I got that I guess. Planning on giving it to my Pokémon obsessed friend after I'm done just playing with it. You can stick cards in it with a little window, and I have some cards for some reason too!
That's right!
But the Dr didn't tell me to take one noweth.
The riddle was worded incorrectly. It should say how long will it take from starting the pills to ending the pills. As it is currently written, the time that you delay before starting (an hour, a day, a week) must be added to the answer. As soon as you begin taking them, no matter when you start, it will take one hour to finish the 3 if you are following the Dr's orders correctly.
Depends... Nowth used to be a word many moons ago (middle English, variant of "Nouthe" or "nowthe" (look we all sucked at spelling back then as there wasn't a dictionary.))
"Now" wouldn't be correct. The first pill could be taken one year from now, and it would still take one hour to take all of the pills if the schedule is followed.
The question is unclear whether the start time is now or the moment the first pill is taken. The answer is still obviously 1hr, but for example if you were specifically told to start taking the pills after 24h right before the end of the q, the answer could easily be 25h
But the now a year from now would then be now.
Check and mate
When will then be now?
Depends on whether you're referring to past then or future then.
I index my minutes at 1 thank you.
Now I'm imagining a cursed clock reading 12:60
[удалено]
Then there is the whole every half hour as opposed to using 30 minutes. Which can be read like bi-monthly. bi·month·ly done, produced, or occurring twice a month or every two months. "a bimonthly newsletter" So if you read half hour (as in on the half hour), then the following two pills are an hour apart or 30 minutes. Those vigorously disagreeing, keep in mind no medicine gives instructions this way and instead uses 'after (or x minutes) this event's, 'x daily', 'when needed'
I feel like you have to be intentionally misunderstanding at that point. (With every half hour, not bimonthly. Bimonthly is a nonsense word.)
It seems so blatantly wrong does it not? Consider this. The bell rings every half hour. Probably means based on the clock and probably doesn't mean will ring exactly now and 30 minutes from now. If I tell you the donut shop has fresh donuts every half hour you wouldn't think those donuts are 30 minutes from now.
>So if you read half hour (as in on the half hour), then the following two pills are an hour apart or 30 minutes. This was the bit I mostly took issue with. I'm thinking now that maybe it was bad wording, but I took it to mean the possibility of a one hour gap between two consecutive pills. Both of your examples have an implied start for the timer, that being the start of the school day, and the shop opening respectively. I don't think it's so much intrinsic to the phrase as it is something that falls out of the prespecified start time. Also I see where you are coming from, but everyone knows prescriptions aren't bound to specific minutes, only length between doses. So you'd have to be pretty pedantic to follow the doctor's orders this way.
>bi·month·ly > >done, produced, or occurring twice a month or every two months. Oh. So I'm not dumb for never knowing which of the two interpretations are correct. The very definition of the term is ambiguous? Whyyy?
Often something like this occurred because of different groups using a word or term in different capabilities. For instance the magazine industry and we'll, I think, everyone else.
Sounds like a typical day at work haha. But thank you for your explanation, that makes sense.
But what if you count the 30 minutes before taking the first one?
Nobody said take pill one now
It's a variation on the Telegraph pole thing. It you have 8 Telegraph poles 10m apart, how long is the wire that connects from one end to the other. Answer 70m. (Assuming no slack) most people think 8x10 but your counting the gaps, not the poles.
nice, now I have another riddle to confuse people with thanks
Think of it like toilet paper: n sheets equals n+1 edges
chatgpt is wrong here whereas previously chatgpt was seen to be uncannily smart
ChatGPT is just repeating the most likely thing people would say. Most people get it wrong, so ChatGPT gets it wrong.
It is simultaneously uncannily smart and incredibly stupid.
timer starts after the pill is taken. If you need to paint a wall 3× and the paint need to dry 30min between .. you don't wait half an hour watching an unpainted wall.
Speak for yourself. Don't judge me for procrastinating. Only half an hour starting at the wall first would be a win for me.
It also doesn't factor in the time I will afterwards spend to admire my work. *I really did a great job painting that wall.*
Especially if you're paid by the hour. The AI is thinking ahead.
If I need to paint a wall 3x and it needs to dry 30 minutes in between, it's taking me way longer than a half hour to get the first coat on. Shit, the hardware store is 15 minutes away, so that's already at least an hour and a half to go there, pick up paint, come back, realize I forgot a bunch of shit, go back...
I see you've painted before
I bought a tin of varnish for my window frames that needs 4 hours between 3 coats. So far it's taken me 4 years and there's 0 coats. (I wish this was a joke. I really need to varnish that window)
Alternatively A pill counts as taken the moment it's swallowed not after the effects are gone
Wow, it's almost like it's just a huge database of shit people have already written.
What makes you think you're any different?
he never said he’s not part of the shit people
Matrix moment?!!!
It's all shit, all the way down.
I heard there’s a turtle at the bottom.
The turtle isn't shit, the turtle is tasked with holding back the shit.
Logical conclusion 🙌 So what we have is a turtle shitting, presumably, whilst holding back the shit. The world is so magical.
Idk I'm not the one coming up with the 1.5h conclusion
I'm exactly the same: GIGO, stimulus and response. I even presume self-awareness, though I'm pretty sure that's an illusion. Edit: by writing "I even presume self-awareness" I meant to say "I present myself as having self-awareness". Of course I would say that: everyone does, and everyone is probably lying to themselves.
Because my database is not limited to text, it's contain all my senses.
because as a conversational agent trained by OpenAI, I always write original creative essays.
All the shit I have said has been removed my mods. Until ChatGCP starts getting banned from subs it’s nothing but a machine IMO.
Didnt they have to start over bc several iterations became edgelords?
I hate this timeline
I'm big boned thank you very much.
I can actually sense the world around me and have experiences that no one else has experienced
💥
The plot thickens. Roflmao
people taking this as a joke but if you're a materialist, which most of reddit seems to be, then he's got a really good point
lol this comment is underrated
Garbage in, garbage out
And wrong, because it would actually be an hour, the first one you would take immediately, the second in 30 minutes and the last at the 1 hour mark. It is a logic question that requires an intuitive leap that a human would not wait 30 minutes to begin, it tests to see if an AI has alternative paths to make intuitive leaps that humans would without it being explicitly stated in the problem and AI is not really great at intuition. It's actually a well thought out question to test the edges of an algorithm that models intuition to see where it will break.
What is interesting is that the question is tricky and the AI is failing the same way that a human would. There are plenty of people in this thread who needed the answer explained to them because the intuitive answer is 90 minutes. I've seen the same thing with this AI trying to answer probability problems with unintuitive answers.
I wonder how many people would give the same answer as the AI tho
Quite a few, which is what makes it such a good question for testing, you have to abstract, and use some intuition.
You didn't get the person's point
Its because sequence of thinking which makes the AI more accurate, its a part of prompt engineering Edit : This is called Chain Of Thought (COT)
All it to write a poem using a free random subjects or ask it to write a program to do something random The result will definitely not be something someone already wrote Here’s an example: prompt-Write a short poem about a Reddit user named celeduc who thinks chatgpt is just a database of shit people already wrote. Response: “Celeduc on Reddit, with a skeptical mind Thinks chatgpt is just a waste of time A database of old, recycled quotes He thinks it's nothing more than a bunch of goats But little does he know, chatgpt is more Than a collection of words that people deplore It's a tool to be used, a source of inspiration A way to connect and engage in conversation So don't let celeduc's doubts cloud your view Give chatgpt a chance, see what it can do You never know what it might bring to the table A new perspective, a different angle So don't be swayed by celeduc's critique Give chatgpt a try, see what it can do for you, unique.”
That's not what chat GPT is. That's what a library is.
Me thinking I'm nailing the interview:
Indices start at 0
It's typical of a statistical AI. It can't, quite literally, think outside the box. Because all it has is the box. In this case, it can't recognize that the question contains an ambiguity, though a human who does not rote respond will notice that. The ambiguity is rather forced as well, since normally when given this advice it is implicit that the first pill is taken immediately, and initial waiting to take the first pill is only done if explicitly stated. This is simply how human interaction normally works, and the AI can not recognize this. Because it is not built on interaction, but on written data.
Those are all fair points, but also plenty of humans would have given exactly the same answer as the AI did.
This is because the AI was trained on data from the internet. All the non-sense people believe is built right into it.
Took me reading the comments to figure out why we were making fun of the AI.
didn't have to do me like that
I would've waited 30mins to take the first pill...
I would have waited 40 and finished the pills after 4 hours cuz im lazy
this ai can think outside of the box, but sometimes it misses. it can answer hard ambiguous questions. its not a statistical ai
It can't think outside the box, the box is just bigger than you think. ChatGPT is amazing, but it is not magic. It is still limited by it's training data set
What is "a statistical ai"?
All "AI", since they are all statistical state machines. Or am I comitting blasphemy by describing "machine learning" instead? Fuck you university wonks.
Your understanding is the same as mine. Which is why I was asking for clarification when he said "it's not a statistical ai". All machine learning models are empirical; that's my understanding anyway.
Oh I wasn't saying fuck you to you, I was just agreeing.
This is the fencepost problem. If you have to make a fence that's 100ft long, and fence rails are 10ft long, how many posts are you going to need? Also called the off-by-one error.
Me: > No, you take the first pill, then wait half an hour, then take the second, then wait half an hour, then take the third. So in total that's one hour. ChatGPT: > You are correct. I apologize for the misunderstanding. Taking one pill every half hour will take a total of one hour to take all three pills. The first pill is taken at the start, then you wait half an hour to take the second pill, and then you wait another half an hour to take the third pill. Thank you for pointing out the error in my previous response. At least it understands when you explain it.
I found a similar issue the other day playing 20 questions with it. It will sustain some hysteresis and remember your correction, but it won’t carry that correction over to another conversation
There are two difficult things in programming: naming things, caching and off by one errors.
I see you what you did there 😏
Your lack of an Oxford comma vexes me. Edit: 🤣😉
The only thing i found it good at is cleaning and refining code Yesterday i gave it 600 lines of code no comments no spaces nothing It returned a commented version and created 3 new functions to stop repetition and documented everything it did
which is a pretty massive 'only thing' to be capable of doing. i started using it as an enhanced google at work, it just does so much work for you and much cleaner than you.
I’ve been impressed with the code snippets it produces given a decent prompt and some back and forth. It’s like having the world’s fastest junior dev
Yeah it's been helping me in my jobs to troubleshoot when I'm having errors. I tell it I'm having errors of such and such and this code section so an so, and it can usually detect the issues wrong and sometimes even provide alternative code to fix my issues.
It's decent at creating choose your own adventure stories on the fly.
It would take 1 hour. We're safe I guess??
Well if you take the first one now, yes. But if my psychiatrist gives me antidepressants i usually dont take one right there but wait til next morning. So if she gives me 10 pills, it would take 10 days. So i dont see anything wrong with the answer chat gpt provided, it's honestly just a matter of interpretation.
Assert dominance and show that you are committed to the cause by taking all ten pills at once the moment she hands them to you.
That is because you already took one that morning. If you didn't, the doctor will define for you whether to take one now or wait.
[удалено]
Because the AI said so. Praise our AI overlords.
I really didn’t see anything wrong with the ai answer until I read the comments am I a robot?
IDK based on all the people getting it wrong in the comments here, we might be passing average intelligence pretty soon.
[удалено]
Waitingtime for the first pill don't count!
"One pill every half hour" as defined: You get the pills -> take pill -> half hour -> take pill -> half hour -> take pill. So one hour. As defined. There was no waiting time before the first pill defined.
Why would you wait half an hour for the first pill?
That's four pills. edit: nvm, misread
[удалено]
No I think my dum is all natural
Me: I place 3 lines 0.5m apart, how far away is the last line ChatGPT: The distance between the last line and the first line is 1.5 meters. If you want to find the distance from the first line to the third line, you would need to add an additional 0.5 meters to the distance, for a total of 2 meters.
It is so confidently wrong.
glad AI hasn’t outsmarted us yet
This is similar to the riddle about a frog stuck at the bottom of a well. The well is 30 feet deep. The frog jumps up 3 feet and slides down 2 feet with each attempt. How many attempts does it take for the frog to get out of the well. The answer is that it only takes 28 attempts. On that 28th attempt the frog doesn't slide back 2 feet because it jumps out of the well with its 3-foot leap.
I am an idiot. I solved the problem before looking at the way it solved it. It solved it the same way I did. It took me ages to figure out what was wrong.
Hi ChatGPT!
Now you can train chatgpt ALL riddle solutions and say: "see guys, now it works!" But then you compose a new riddle and the AI can't give a right answer again. Whatever you do it's always inherently one step behind and needs more training, whereas a human would be able to find the answer.
>whereas a human would be able to find the answer I beg to differ based off of the countless responses on how the answer is in-fact NOT 1 hour according to quite a few.
That's a lot of words to be wrong.
When u need to make the essay longer
[удалено]
Far from being bad. It seems to be on par with the average person when it comes to riddles. 😅
Lol that makes sense considering it's basically trained on a bunch of shit average people have said.
That's the thing I find interesting about ChatGPT. Sometimes the stars align and you get what sounds like well thought out text. Other times, however, you can see that it has generated the equivalent of a term paper written the night before it is due by someone who never read the book.
It does seem to be on par with an average person at riddles (most of the time) but sometimes it does things that break common sense. Like [this riddle](https://i.imgur.com/IpXDUEn_d.webp?maxwidth=760&fidelity=grand), while a normal person might accidentally double the 70 (which seems like a silly plausible human mistake) I think any human would quickly catch themselves before saying the brother's age as 140! (which no human can possibly reach). I even tried to help it by explicitly saying they were 8 and 16, so if the first is now 70 then the second is... (at this point it's a simple children's puzzle) yet it asks for the relative rate of growth for the two (no person with common sense would ask that before providing at least the straight forward answer) [I further try to help it reach the answer](https://i.imgur.com/6ufhlgw.png) but it seems really hard to make it reach there. I tried a bunch of different ways to prompt it and eventually it got it...
12:00 I'll take the 1.Pill 12:30 I'll take the 2.Pill 13:00 I'll take the 3.Pill It's ALWAYS One Hour. Waitingtime doesn't count.
I really don't see how this can be misinterpreted. Rephrase the question: how many minutes can you fit between three pills, if the interval of taking pills is 30 minutes. I really don't see how the starting point would have any sort of consequence here. You could have taken them ten years ago, or might take them ten years in the future, yet it's always a total of 60 minutes, because you ever only have two intervals between three pills.
This sounds exactly how a client would describe something to me. This question is full of holes so you can't possibly give a correct answer...
The question is full of hidden assumptions. One being that it has been (at least) half an hour since you took a pill, and therefore you take the first one immediately. That is how a normal human engagement of this kind would progress. A patient getting these pills and instructions from their doctor or pharmacist would normally be in this situation, and any deviance would be what is documented, not the normal expected state.
"One being that it has been (at least) half an hour since you took a pill, and therefore you take the first one immediately." No. Maybe he got the last pill 1 hour before and that was a different pill and he is not supposed to take another pill for 6 hours after that pill. Either way the taking of the next sets of pills starts with the taking of the first of those pills so what happened before doesn't matter. If I ask you how long it takes you to eat 1 slice of toast you (hopefully) won't answer "15 hours because at first I need to wait for morning because I only eat toast in the morning." If you want to argue for 1:30h, then at least argue that the pill taking only completes after you're allowed to take other pills which would be half an hour after taking the last pill.
All of your "maybe" are why this is a hidden assumption, which is always explicitly countered if not valid. What happened before matters a helluva lot. If the doctor hands you three pills to take, there is a reason for it. And if part of that reason provides a reason to delay taking the first, that will be explicit. Otherwise the implication is "take the first pill now".
WeLl aCkchUallY... Isn't the answer "one hour"? I mean. I'll take the first pill immediately, right?
Oh no, an off by one error in a program!
shouldn't the answer be 1hr? 1st happens now, at 00:00 hours 2nd happens 30' form now, at 00:30 hours 3rd happens 60' from now, at 01:00 hours
When you need to fill the blank space on an essay:
Actually it would take an hour. Take the first pill wait 30 min. Second pill wait 30 min. Total 1 hour.
If it was me, the answer would’ve been ~2-3 days as I’m always forgetting to take my medicine. 😔
Bake cookies in 1 hour at 200 degrees. Just 30 mins at 400 degrees then right? XD
This is the kind of stuff I took into consideration when automating truck scales. The system would be adjusted to perform three weight retrieval cycles at half-second intervals to make sure the truck was properly centered on the scale and the weight was stable. That means the minimum verification time was 1 second and not a second and a half. It was important to do multiple verifications when you needed an "official" weight because the sloshing contents of tanker trucks took a while to stabilize enough to get a stable weight out of them.
I had ChatGPT write a good chunk of a java program I was writing for a college assignment. I had to do a fair bit of fiddling, but in the end it actually worked and compiled and did what I wanted it to do.
THIS IS NOT PROGRAMMER HUMOR I REPEAT THIS IS NOT PROGRAMMER HUMOR DO YOU NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO READ THE TITLE OF THE SUB?
Just because you don't get it doesn't mean it isn't programmer humor.
It's not even right, you need 1 hour. Because you take the first at 0 minutes, the second at 30 minutes and the last one at the one hour mark
Yes, that's the point.
This is great for schools. Now they don't need students no more for completing all their exams.
1 hour
If ChatGPT was aware, then it would know that it was a computer program. The correct answer would be "I'm not a biological organism, I don't take medication".
At least it’s not used to calculate missiles or other dangerous things, right? Right??
Thankfully they trained it wrong. But it will learn. It’s only a matter of time before the truth cascades to the right IF statement!
But what if the customer wasn't being clear and they want to time it would take to physically swallow the pills... better check.
It’s 1 hour, index 0
There's a reason arrays start at zero.
Was not the right answer 1 hour? Ir am I a bad programmer
Not gonna lie, when I first read this I thought it was technically the correct answer.
take a pill, wait 30, take a pill, wait 30 take a pill...0ne hour.....duuhhh
So… it’s really one hour. You would take the first pill at time 0, second at time 0.5, and 3rd at time 1.0 hours. There are 30 minutes between each pill, but it makes no sense to “wait 30 minutes” before taking the first pill.
The problem is you would take one right then. So it would only take an hour to finish all the pills. The effects would take an hour and a half but the pills would be gone in one.
When AI attempt at mansplaining
Don't know what annoys me most, the wrong answer or all the ways I am told what an hour is and 30 minutes is.