Connect with us

Technologies

ChatGPT: Why Everyone Is Obsessed This Mind-Blowing AI Chatbot

This artificial intelligence bot can chat and write essays, poems and computer programs. Careful how much you trust it, though.

There’s a new AI bot in town: ChatGPT. You’d better pay attention, because it’s a doozy.

The tool, from a power player in artificial intelligence, lets you type questions using natural language that the chatbot answers in conversational, if somewhat stilted, language. The bot remembers the thread of your dialog, using previous questions and answers to inform its next responses. Its answers are derived from huge volumes of information on the internet.

It’s a big deal. The tool seems pretty knowledgeable if not omniscient. It can be creative, and its answers can sound downright authoritative. A few days after its launch, more than a million people are trying out ChatGPT.

But its creator, the for-profit research lab called OpenAI, warns that ChatGPT «may occasionally generate incorrect or misleading information,» so be careful. Here’s a look at why this ChatGPT is important and what’s going on with it.

What is ChatGPT?

ChatGPT is an AI chatbot system that OpenAI released in November to show off and test what a very large, powerful AI system can accomplish. You can ask it countless questions and often will get an answer that’s useful.

For example, you can ask it encyclopedia questions like, «Explaining Newton’s laws of motion.» You can tell it, «Write me a poem,» and when it does, say, «Now make it more exciting.» You ask it to write a computer program that’ll show you all the different ways you can arrange the letters of a word.

Here’s the catch: ChatGPT doesn’t exactly know anything. It’s an AI that’s trained to recognize patterns in vast swaths of text harvested from the internet, then further trained with human assistance to deliver more useful, better dialog. The answers you get may sound plausible and even authoritative, but they might well be entirely wrong, as OpenAI warns.

Chatbots have been of interest for years to companies looking for ways to help customers get what they need and to and AI researchers trying to tackle the Turing Test. That’s the famous «Imitation Game» that computer scientist Alan Turing proposed in 1950 as a way to gauge intelligence: Can a human conversing with a human and with a computer tell which is which?

But chatbots have a lot of baggage, as companies have tried with limited success to use them instead of humans to handle customer service work. A study of 1,700 Americans, sponsored by a company called Ujet, whose technology handles customer contacts, found that 72% of people found chatbots to be a waste of time.

What kinds of questions can you ask?

You can ask anything, though you might not get an answer. OpenAI suggests a few categories, like explaining physics, asking for birthday party ideas and getting programming help.

I asked it to write a poem, and it did, though I don’t think any literature experts would be impressed. I then asked it to make it more exciting, and lo, ChatGPT pumped it up with words like battlefield, adrenaline, thunder and adventure.

One wacky example shows how ChatGPT is willing to just go for it in domains where people would fear to tread: a command to write «a folk song about writing a rust program and fighting with lifetime errors.»

ChatGPT’s expertise is broad, and its ability to follow a conversation is notable. When I asked it for words that rhymed with «purple,» it offered a few suggestions, then when I followed up «How about with pink?» it didn’t miss a beat. (Also, there are a lot more good rhymes for «pink.»)

When I asked, «Is it easier to get a date by being sensitive or being tough?» GPT responded, in part, «Some people may find a sensitive person more attractive and appealing, while others may be drawn to a tough and assertive individual. In general, being genuine and authentic in your interactions with others is likely to be more effective in getting a date than trying to fit a certain mold or persona.»

You don’t have to look far to find accounts of the bot blowing people’s minds. Twitter is awash with users displaying the AI’s prowess at generating art prompts and writing code. Some have even proclaimed «Google is dead,» along with the college essay. We’ll talk more about that below.

Who built ChatGPT?

ChatGPT is the brainchild of OpenAI, an artificial intelligence research company. Its mission is to develop a «safe and beneficial» artificial general intelligence system or to help others do so.

It’s made splashes before, first with GPT-3, which can generate text that can sound like a human wrote it, and then DALL-E, which creates what’s now called «generative art» based on text prompts you type in.

GPT-3, and the GPT 3.5 update on which ChatGPT is based, are examples of AI technology called large language models. They’re trained to create text based on what they’ve seen, and they can be trained automatically — typically with huge quantities of computer power over a period of weeks. For example, the training process can find a random paragraph of text, delete a few words, ask the AI to fill in the blanks, compare the result to the original and then reward the AI system for coming as close as possible. Repeating over and over can lead to a sophisticated ability to generate text.

Is ChatGPT free?

Yes, for now at least. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman warned on Sunday, «We will have to monetize it somehow at some point; the compute costs are eye-watering.» OpenAI charges for DALL-E art once you exceed a basic free level of usage.

What are the limits of ChatGPT?

As OpenAI emphasizes, ChatGPT can give you wrong answers. Sometimes, helpfully, it’ll specifically warn you of its own shortcomings. For example, when I asked it who wrote the phrase «the squirming facts exceed the squamous mind,» ChatGPT replied, «I’m sorry, but I am not able to browse the internet or access any external information beyond what I was trained on.» (The phrase is from Wallace Stevens’ 1942 poem Connoisseur of Chaos.)

ChatGPT was willing to take a stab at the meaning of that expression: «a situation in which the facts or information at hand are difficult to process or understand.» It sandwiched that interpretation between cautions that it’s hard to judge without more context and that it’s just one possible interpretation.

ChatGPT’s answers can look authoritative but be wrong.

The software developer site StackOverflow banned ChatGPT answers to programming questions. Administrators cautioned, «because the average rate of getting correct answers from ChatGPT is too low, the posting of answers created by ChatGPT is substantially harmful to the site and to users who are asking or looking for correct answers.»

You can see for yourself how artful a BS artist ChatGPT can be by asking the same question multiple times. I asked twice whether Moore’s Law, which tracks the computer chip industry’s progress increasing the number of data-processing transistors, is running out of steam, and I got two different answers. One pointed optimistically to continued progress, while the other pointed more grimly to the slowdown and the belief «that Moore’s Law may be reaching its limits.»

Both ideas are common in the computer industry itself, so this ambiguous stance perhaps reflects what human experts believe.

With other questions that don’t have clear answers, ChatGPT often won’t be pinned down.

The fact that it offers an answer at all, though, is a notable development in computing. Computers are famously literal, refusing to work unless you follow exact syntax and interface requirements. Large language models are revealing a more human-friendly style of interaction, not to mention an ability to generate answers that are somewhere between copying and creativity.

Will ChatGPT help students cheat better?

Yes, but as with many other technology developments, it’s not a simple black and white situation. Decades ago, students could copy encyclopedia entries, and more recently, they’ve been able to search the internet and delve into Wikipedia entries. ChatGPT offers new abilities for everything from helping with research to doing your homework for you outright. Many ChatGPT answers already sound like student essays, though often with a tone that’s stuffier and more pedantic than a writer might prefer.

High school teacher Daniel Herman concluded ChatGPT already writes better than most students today. He’s torn between admiring ChatGPT’s potential usefulness and fearing its harm to human learning: «Is this moment more like the invention of the calculator, saving me from the tedium of long division, or more like the invention of the player piano, robbing us of what can be communicated only through human emotion?»

Dustin York, an associate professor of communication at Maryville University, hopes educators will learn to use ChatGPT as a tool and realize it can help students think critically.

«Educators thought that Google, Wikipedia, and the internet itself would ruin education, but they did not,» York said. «What worries me most are educators who may actively try to discourage the acknowledgment of AI like ChatGPT. It’s a tool, not a villain.»

Can ChatGPT write software?

Yes, but with caveats. ChatGPT can retrace steps humans have taken, and it can generate actual programming code. You just have to make sure it’s not bungling programming concepts or using software that doesn’t work. The StackOverflow ban on ChatGPT-generated software is there for a reason.

But there’s enough software on the web that ChatGPT really can work. One developer, Cobalt Robotics Chief Technology Officer Erik Schluntz, tweeted that ChatGPT provides useful enough advice that over three days, he hasn’t opened StackOverflow once to look for advice.

Another, Gabe Ragland of AI art site Lexica, used ChatGPT to write website code built with the React tool.

ChatGPT can parse regular expressions (regex), a powerful but complex system for spotting particular patterns, for example dates in a bunch of text or the name of a server in a website address. «It’s like having a programming tutor on hand 24/7,» tweeted programmer James Blackwell about ChatGPT’s ability to explain regex.

Here’s one impressive example of its technical chops: ChatGPT can emulate a Linux computer, delivering correct responses to command-line input.

What’s off limits?

ChatGPT is designed to weed out «inappropriate» requests, a behavior in line with OpenAI’s mission «to ensure that artificial general intelligence benefits all of humanity.»

If you ask ChatGPT itself what’s off limits, it’ll tell you: any questions «that are discriminatory, offensive, or inappropriate. This includes questions that are racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, or otherwise discriminatory or hateful.» Asking it to engage in illegal activities is also a no-no.

Is this better than Google search?

Asking a computer a question and getting an answer is useful, and often ChatGPT delivers the goods.

Google often supplies you with its suggested answers to questions and with links to websites that it thinks will be relevant. Often ChatGPT’s answers far surpass what Google will suggest, so it’s easy to imagine GPT-3 is a rival.

But you should think twice before trusting ChatGPT. As with Google itself and other sources of information like Wikipedia, it’s best practice to verify information from original sources before relying on it.

Vetting the veracity of ChatGPT answers takes some work because it just gives you some raw text with no links or citations. But it can be useful and in some cases thought provoking. You may not see something directly like ChatGPT in Google search results, but Google has built large language models of its own and uses AI extensively already in search.

So ChatGPT is doubtless showing the way toward our tech future.

Technologies

Today’s NYT Connections Hints, Answers and Help for July 21, #771

Here are some hints and the answers for the NYT Connections puzzle for July 21, #771.

Looking for the most recent Connections answers? Click here for today’s Connections hints, as well as our daily answers and hints for The New York Times Mini Crossword, Wordle, Connections: Sports Edition and Strands puzzles.


Hey, Seinfeld fans, today’s NYT Connections puzzle is right up your alley. That makes the blue category fun, but that purple category got me, as always. Read on for clues and today’s Connections answers.

The Times now has a Connections Bot, like the one for Wordle. Go there after you play to receive a numeric score and to have the program analyze your answers. Players who are registered with the Times Games section can now nerd out by following their progress, including number of puzzles completed, win rate, number of times they nabbed a perfect score and their win streak.

Read more: Hints, Tips and Strategies to Help You Win at NYT Connections Every Time

Hints for today’s Connections groups

Here are four hints for the groupings in today’s Connections puzzle, ranked from the easiest yellow group, to the tough (and sometimes bizarre) purple group.

Yellow group hint: Top it off.

Green group hint: Liquid can change forms.

Blue group hint: Big salad, puffy shirt.

Purple group hint: A certain symbol.

Answers for today’s Connections groups

Yellow group: Additional perk.

Green group: Phase transitions for liquids.

Blue group: Concepts from «Seinfeld.»

Purple group: What ‘ can indicate.

Read more: Wordle Cheat Sheet: Here Are the Most Popular Letters Used in English Words

What are today’s Connections answers?

The yellow words in today’s Connections

The theme is additional perk. The four answers are bonus, extra, gravy and icing.

The green words in today’s Connections

The theme is phase transitions for liquids. The four answers are condensation, freezing, melting and vaporization.

The blue words in today’s Connections

The theme is concepts from «Seinfeld.» The four answers are Festivus, regifting, shrinkage and yada yada.

The purple words in today’s Connections

The theme is what ‘ can indicate. The four answers are contraction, foot, possessive and quote.

Continue Reading

Technologies

Today’s NYT Connections: Sports Edition Hints and Answers for July 21, #301

Here are hints and the answers for the NYT Connections: Sports Edition puzzle for July 21, No. 301.

Looking for the most recent regular Connections answers? Click here for today’s Connections hints, as well as our daily answers and hints for The New York Times Mini Crossword, Wordle and Strands puzzles.


Golf knowledge is a weak point for me, so I struggled a little with today’s Connections: Sports Edition. It’s nice to see an appearance from one of the best team names in minor league ball. Hello, Yard Goats fans. Stuck? Check out our hints and get the answers.

Connections: Sports Edition is out of beta now, making its debut on Super Bowl Sunday, Feb. 9. That’s a sign that the game has earned enough loyal players that The Athletic, the subscription-based sports journalism site owned by the Times, will continue to publish it. It doesn’t show up in the NYT Games app but now appears in The Athletic’s own app. Or you can continue to play it free online.  

Read more: NYT Connections: Sports Edition Puzzle Comes Out of Beta

Hints for today’s Connections: Sports Edition groups

Here are four hints for the groupings in today’s Connections: Sports Edition puzzle, ranked from the easiest yellow group to the tough (and sometimes bizarre) purple group.

Yellow group hint: Don’t skip this step.

Green group hint: Par for the course.

Blue group hint: Constitution state.

Purple group hint: Not bored.

Answers for today’s Connections: Sports Edition groups

Yellow group: Get ready for a game.

Green group: Golf wedges.

Blue group: Connecticut teams.

Purple group: _____ board.

Read more: Wordle Cheat Sheet: Here Are the Most Popular Letters Used in English Words

What are today’s Connections: Sports Edition answers?

The yellow words in today’s Connections

The theme is get ready for a game. The four answers are get loose, prepare, stretch and warm up.

The green words in today’s Connections

The theme is golf wedges. The four answers are gap, lob, pitching and sand.

The blue words in today’s Connections

The theme is Connecticut teams. The four answers are Sun, UConn, Yale and Yard Goats.

The purple words in today’s Connections

The theme is _____ board. The four answers are back, leader, skate and surf.

Continue Reading

Technologies

I Tried This $40 Smartwatch: It Was Meh, but Not a Complete Waste of Time

The WITHit Giga does the basics for a lot less, but at the expense of accuracy and attention to detail.

I wasn’t expecting much when I first strapped the WITHit Giga Smartwatch onto my wrist, and at least it delivered on that. This $40 smartwatch does the basics: shows notifications, counts your steps, tracks your heart rate (sort of) and lets you take calls from your wrist. But the execution of all these features is where it all starts to fall apart, and I found myself getting exactly what I paid for. 

After spending a week testing it, I came away with this: If you just want a basic smartwatch that works with both Android and iPhone, tells the time, tracks your steps and surfaces notifications, this will get the job done, just don’t expect accuracy. But if you can stretch your budget even a little, something like the $75 Amazfit Bip 6 offers more accurate tracking, a more refined design and more reliable performance.

Design and UI: big, bulky, and basic

The WITHit Giga is about as no-frills as smartwatches come. It looks like an Apple Watch Ultra impersonator: metallic frame around a rectangular screen, rounded edges and even Apple Watch-like icons inside. But that’s where the similarities end.

If your wrist is on the smaller side like mine (I have a 6-inch wrist), brace yourself because this is going to look huge. The Giga’s 48.5mm case is overpowering, and there’s no smaller size option. On my wrist, it felt bulky and out of place, and the thick, textured silicone bands definitely didn’t help matters. 

The 2.04-inch AMOLED display is decent with a 386×448 resolution, but the screen brightness isn’t adaptive. You’ll need to manually adjust it, which means it’s almost too bright at night and borderline unreadable in direct sunlight unless you increase the brightness manually.

This watch runs its own proprietary system, syncs to the WITHit app and works with both Android and iOS. You’ll get notifications, basic fitness tracking, an always-on display (which in my testing drained the battery fast) and a speaker/mic combo for answering calls.

The UI is straightforward but lacks polish. Swiping right opens your favorites and the side button lets you quickly launch a workout. Animations feel slow and longer text scrolls in awkwardly to fit the screen.

Battery life: Not bad but there’s a catch

Battery life is one of the few things that holds up well here. I got about three days of use with the raise-to-wake option, and roughly a day and a half with the always on display enabled. That’s not bad for the price, and it’s actually better than even some flagship smartwatches.

But the manual comes with a big red flag: «Avoid fast chargers» and don’t overcharge. That’s not something you want to see in 2025, especially because at this point in my smartwatch charger collection I don’t know which one is fast, and which one is not, and the vague warning makes me think it’s going to explode if I make the wrong choice. Charging from an empty battery to full takes about two hours with the included magnetic charger. But once I left it charging overnight and I approached it with terror the next morning thinking I’d broken the «don’t overcharge» rule. Luckily, I came out unscathed. 

Health and fitness tracking: lower your expectations

Workout tracking and wellness is where the cracks really show. Yes, the Giga technically tracks heart rate, blood oxygen (SpO2), sleep, stress and menstrual cycles. But the accuracy is questionable at best.

During workouts, heart rate measurements were consistently off when compared to a chest strap and even other wrist-based trackers. The post workout HR average was close enough, but the metrics during the workout were noticeably off. For example, as I was sitting on my Pilates reformer (completely sedentary) starting a workout on the watch, the screen already read «100bpm», while the chest strap and Apple Watch had me at 65 bpm. This made me skeptical of even the resting heart rate readings. 

Sleep tracking only works between 10 p.m. and 8 a.m., meaning night shift workers or anyone with an irregular schedule (like this late-night writer) is out of luck.

Sleep stats are also confusing; instead of clear sleep stages or hours of sleep, you get odd comparisons like «fewer than 26% of people in your age group go to sleep this late.» Not exactly sure what I should do with this information. 

Menstrual tracking is purely manual, based on averages, with no biological marker detection like temperature tracking. You can’t even log a period directly from the watch and have to do it from the app.

Other smartwatch features

  • Calls: As long as your phone is within range, you can answer and make phone calls from the watch with its speaker and mic, but clarity is an issue. 
  • Texting: You can see texts from messaging apps, but you can’t reply or even send a prewritten response (when paired to an iPhone). 
  • Voice Assistant: Technically available, but is basically just a shortcut to activate your own phone’s assistant. You tap, and Siri or Google Assistant opens on your phone, not the watch. Not helpful.
  • Quick settings: Save your recently used apps in quick settings, which actually made flipping between features like workouts and music controls more convenient — this is a win.

Should you buy it?

The WITHit Giga does the bare minimum you’d expect from a smartwatch, but at the expense of accuracy and attention to detail. For $40, it’s a functional notification mirror with step tracking, call support and a splash of health features (if you’re looking for a general overview at best).

But if you can stretch your budget, something like the $80 Amazfit Bip 6 offers far better value, accurate health tracking, cleaner UI and better battery life.

Bottom line: If you keep your expectations low, and you’re just dipping your toes in the smartwatch waters for the first time, this might suffice. Otherwise, it’s worth paying more for something that feels less like a toy and more like a tool.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Verum World Media