Since December, there has been quite a lot of noise about ChatGPT. Perhaps even here there may have been comments hailing a great new step in the field of intelligence or even AGI.
However, in my own experience, I've managed to force (for a lack of better word) ChatGPT3 (update I think it was December 15th, 2022) into consistently producing errors in our interaction. I wrote a post documenting my experience and thoughts here:
January Researchgate post
I have screenshots of three or four more attempts where I successfully produced the errors, which I can provide upon request (or if I figure it out how to do so here).
Yesterday, after a significantly longer conversation (around an hour), I also managed to produce an error on the February 13th update of ChatGPT (the one currently in use). I have a video of the whole conversation, again I can share it here.
There were no threats or weird behaviour by ChatGPT, all I noticed was the ease at which it was contradicting itself or getting into tangles, at times taking a while to get back to me as if 'it was thinking' before finally giving up and producing an error.
However, after discussing with a friend, I was presented with the worrying possibility that something else may be going on underneath the bonnet. This was the possibility that, at least the last error, which was produced after I waited for 20 mins for it to finish its sentence was produced by mechanisms similar to the ones used in the Great China Firewall, at least in terms of the way it filters and blocks conversations containing certain keywords by slowing things down and eventually producing errors. I would really appreciate if there are any OpenAI people reading this who could reassure me that this is not the case.
Anybody have similar observations? Have you noticed (with evidence, preferably screenshots or videos of conversations) ChatGPT faltering in conversations and eventually producing errors? Any programmers out there who could explain to me why it would 'get itself in tangles' over the topic of what constitutes opinion and information or what is a discussion? Anybody out there who can convince me that it is really 'intelligent' in a way that one may trust it with (even parts of) significant decisions or citations, or even useful conversations, as it claims?
Thanks for the space,