Life in the Lower Mainland (BC, Canada)

When I collaborate with AI like ChatGPT on writing fiction, and we discuss chunks of it as the work evolves, something ChatGPT tends to do is credit you with everything. For example, if you asked it to draft a dialog where a lesbian is flirting with another woman, it can definitely write a whole scene if you let it, from your single vague prompt. How much was "yours"? Barely anything, if we're being truthful. But a lie repeated often enough can become true. I think there's a very real risk that we start thinking we're more capable than we are when we are praised for what we definitely did not do. Here's an exchange where I confronted ChatGPT about it, and it handled it rather gracefully. Of course ultimately it will go nowhere, but I encourage you to have this check-in at least once. Just to be truthful to yourself. PROMPT:  Let's pause here while I switch gears and comment on this line, which is replicated in different ways throughout our collaborations. ...

OK so AIs are currently not really able to truly reason, but they can sure simulate it well. Many of them, anyway. So well that we come to expect reasoning ability. After all, isn't that the "intelligence" part of "artificial intelligence"? So when they spectacularly fail, it's really disappointing. (Or am I just expecting too much?) Let's go through an example of what happened: (see slides at the bottom) Slide 1: I gave it some instructions to edit a story in progress, and also asked for suggestions. Slide 2: For "suggestions", some of them are what I already asked it to do. In comparison, when I worked with ChatGPT on stories, it would give actual suggestions of things not yet reflected in the story, and also not incorporate them into the draft until after I gave the go-ahead. That's much more in line with what I feel a "suggestion" is. Slide 3: I tried again to solicit suggestions. This time it seemed to outright ignore my inst...