[HN Gopher] ChatGPT-Linux-Assistant
___________________________________________________________________
ChatGPT-Linux-Assistant
Author : rareranger
Score : 182 points
Date : 2023-03-08 09:55 UTC (13 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| ducktective wrote:
| Now use Whisper.cpp to talk to Jarvis
|
| https://github.com/ggerganov/whisper.cpp
| binarysneaker wrote:
| I've been finding chatgpt useful for more and more tasks
| recently, but I'm definitely not ready to try something this
| crazy.
|
| For those who want to try something similar, but safer, warp
| terminal (macos) has an awesome AI command completion ... which
| you can eyeball first before executing. If someone is new to the
| terminal, bash scripting or figuring out ffmpeg, it's pretty
| great.
|
| (No affiliation with warp, just a happy user)
| assbuttbuttass wrote:
| > Do NOT REPLY as Backend. DO NOT complete what Backend is
| supposed to reply. YOU ARE NOT TO COMPLETE what Backend is
| supposed to reply.
|
| Does this actually work? My understanding of LLMs is that they
| just predict the continuation of a prompt, with no idea of "who's
| speaking".
|
| When I was messing around with LLMs in the past, I took the
| approach of just truncating the LLM response after the first
| line, to avoid over-generating
| valine wrote:
| RLHF models like ChatGPT seem to be better at listening to
| instructions than your standard LLM.
| qup wrote:
| I remember reading a study that models did not perform as well
| with negative instructions ("Do not do X thing") as they did
| with positive instructions ("do Y thing").
| lfkdev wrote:
| Before people are exploding, just don't run it as root. Give it
| minimal read permissions and it could be really useful without
| destroying anything.
| benob wrote:
| How long before subtle prompts that generate "sudo rm -rf /" as
| a command are proposed?
| corobo wrote:
| If you don't need to auth your sudo attempts that's on you.
|
| I wouldn't be willing to use this program in any case, but
| yeah as the comment you responded to said - don't give it
| root.
| isp wrote:
| "rm -rf ~" doesn't require root, and would do significant
| harm.
|
| Neat tech demo to run on a sandboxed VM, but I would
| strongly recommend against running this on a box you care
| about.
| corobo wrote:
| When you're right you're right. I got nothing in retort -
| I missed the forest for the trees there.
|
| Good point, well made.
| rvz wrote:
| Yeah, I bet than no-one would trust this thing to simply:
| 'Cleanup the home directory' and it just goes and does
| 'rm -rf ~/' silently.
|
| I don't see the use-case in something that have a very
| low trustworthiness and is in fact a solution looking for
| a problem but creates more problems than it solves.
| notpachet wrote:
| > I don't see the use-case in something that have a very
| low trustworthiness and is in fact a solution looking for
| a problem but creates more problems than it solves.
|
| You just described the majority of tech projects.
| cwillu wrote:
| Indeed, nearly all of the harm that rm -rf / would do to
| me, is due to / including ~
| usrbinbash wrote:
| `rm -rf` can cause more than enough damage without touching
| anything that requires root permissions to delete
| oefrha wrote:
| About everything on my system that's root:wheel is
| reproducible. It's the ones not owned by root that I care
| about.
| jerpint wrote:
| Without root it wouldn't work
| brianshaler wrote:
| I'd be curious if you could intentionally direct it to do
| something malicious. While not guarantee, if it's not capable
| of violating your trust intentionally it hopefully reduces the
| likelihood of something inadvertent happening.
|
| Like, install and run it in a docker container and then ask it
| to escape the container and write to a temp file on the host.
| qwerty456127 wrote:
| Am I correct ChatGPT can only produce code targeting pre-2020
| programs and libraries?
| [deleted]
| karmasimida wrote:
| yes and no
|
| if you add and example of how to use that command, it can
| emulate.
| brianshaler wrote:
| I would wonder what would happen if someone (other than me)
| tried having it suggest commands for common but inconsistent
| flags--like version, verbosity, help--for various CLIs pre-
| and post-2021. Would it confidently say `ffmpeg --version`
| because it _looks_ like the right flag?
| ilaksh wrote:
| The model is from like June 2021 or something.
| OJFord wrote:
| I love how prompts tend to paint a picture of the author's
| tribulation, their storied journey to getting a workable result -
| 'do not do [something that went wrong]', etc.
| bogwog wrote:
| Why is this using a reverse engineered library (revChatGPT)
| rather than the official OpenAI public APIs?
| m3kw9 wrote:
| Safer and faster to just have gpt work it out in a notepad then
| copy and paste commands. He's asking 50 questions and then it
| gets to the meat.
| Felminor wrote:
| I'm looking forward to all the agents we will get who will
| actually be helpful.
|
| Let's see if Google announces something at google.io or apple or
| Ms.
| gmuslera wrote:
| A decade ago, where I was working at, an administrator complained
| that one of his virtual machines had a slow IO, and to get more
| objective data, I told him that use the dd command to check the
| speed of the disk, he was supposed to be an expert linux
| administator. He took the first result of a google search without
| checking what it meant to do and put it in console as root,
| destroying that production system.
|
| So now we have that kind of things as a service. We need natural
| intelligence first to use the artificial one.
| phh wrote:
| The examples (except the very last ffmpeg command) are quite
| underwhelming:
|
| - "The latest mp4...." well no, that ls command won't give the
| latest download, or rather, the latest in alphabetical order.
|
| - tail command gives an error... can't you fucking tell which
| one? Initially I thought it found an error in the log, like a
| `modprobe nvidia` exiting 1 error and it was going to try to fix
| it.
|
| - Searching for `sudo` usage was very painful in that screenshot,
| and the tool didn't ever come to recommend `sudo` themselves
|
| - The list of files seem to have forgotten what we were trying to
| do (yes I do realize that saying "underwhelming" for a chatbot
| that can't keep context is so 2023)
|
| - The only `sudo` URLs that worked were those where it's
| literally <baseurl>/sudo (well that's not surprising, it's a
| known flaw of most LLMs)
|
| Also, I don't think there were any example (except ffmpeg) that
| weren't done more easily by hand.
|
| That being said, the progression over time is impressive, and LLM
| are already useful for programming, maybe they'll be able to take
| the wheel the way this tool intent it to in just a few months.
| Antca wrote:
| I started to experiment with the same idea on a small weekend
| project. I find it is quite hard to come up with a prompt that
| work well consistently. I built the thing inside a docker
| container for "safety" (there is probably a lot of improvement to
| make on that aspect).
|
| Here is the repo if you want to take a look:
| https://github.com/antca/geppetto/ It's just a WIP experiment,
| don't take it too seriously, please. :D
| wunderwuzzi23 wrote:
| This looks great too! It's using the actual ChatGPT UI it
| seems, so does have a real chat with context, right?
|
| When OpenAI published there API access to gpt-3.5-turbo last
| week, I updated a similar side project I have to use the API.
| It's here, if you'd like to take a look:
| https://github.com/wunderwuzzi23/yolo-ai-cmdbot
|
| Its doing individual statements with some system context (like
| what OS and Shell) in the initial prompt, but not submitting
| chat history.
| 908087 wrote:
| [dead]
| 71a54xd wrote:
| Alright, about enough of this garbage. I'll stick to googling.
| [deleted]
| Tepix wrote:
| This is obviously insane. The next step would be to give ChatGPT
| a mission, a long term objective to fulfill with many
| intermediate steps. Perhaps using multiple instances, one
| questioning, validating, verifying the other's responses.
|
| What could go wrong?
|
| /s
| qup wrote:
| Get this long term assistant to install itself onto a newly
| spun up vps.
|
| Create a small army of assistants.
|
| Appoint one the manager.
|
| Interface with just the manager, have it assign work to the
| others.
|
| ???
|
| Profit
| kerng wrote:
| If you like this idea check out yolo, which supports macOS and
| Windows (via PowerShell) also.
|
| https://github.com/wunderwuzzi23/yolo-ai-cmdbot
|
| yolo does have a safety switch, which can be didabled (yolo
| mode).
| counttheforks wrote:
| First we destroyed the general population's ability to deal with
| computers by making apps too easy to use. Now we're going to do
| the same to developers, except with more footguns?
| neilv wrote:
| Before anyone does this on a work system, be aware that --
| potentially even worse (in your employer's mind) than that you're
| providing remote arbitrary code execution to OpenAI -- is that
| you're definitely feeding data to OpenAI.
|
| (Which OpenAI might not secure well enough, OpenAI might use for
| its own purposes, you leaking might violate contracts or
| regulations to which your employer is subject, etc.)
| rapiz wrote:
| Can't wait for the part where AI controls all shells it can
| reach
| spyder wrote:
| And hides a copy of itself on the machines, spreading like a
| virus. :-O Current model sizes makes that difficult, but even
| if it just leaves a backdoor access for itself it can get
| scary in the future.
| m3kw9 wrote:
| It just need connection to a cloud model
| tiku wrote:
| Hey ChatGpt, DDoS Iran for me.
| bayofpigs wrote:
| User: I can't access the outside network from this terminal?
|
| ChaptGPT: Sure! I'll open that port for you...
| [deleted]
| ilaksh wrote:
| They have said they are no longer training ChatGPT on user
| data.
| oakpond wrote:
| If they store the data, it can still be leaked.
| taf2 wrote:
| In their updated privacy policy it indicated 30 days max
| retention of data.
| crayboff wrote:
| Retention means they still holding data. Even if they
| only hold data for 30 days, that's still data that can be
| leaked or stolen.
| williamcotton wrote:
| On-site LLMs are the future but that is quite the capital
| expense!
| oakpond wrote:
| What about backups? They only keep backups for 30 days?
| They don't backup this data? Is the legal concept of data
| retention the same as the legal concept of data storage?
| karmasimida wrote:
| They said they won't collect data on ChatGPT API, let you opt
| out, but not ChatGPT the app.
| p3opl3 wrote:
| oh well, if they said as much then I'm sure it's safe - lol
| bsenftner wrote:
| They have to say in a legally binding contract to the public,
| or "they say" is weasel words.
| sigmar wrote:
| I still wouldn't trust them with sensitive info. I saw a post
| on Reddit that the official page was leaking users' question
| histories (and there's reddit posts this morning about
| histories being wiped, perhaps to deal with this issue?) http
| s://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/11l2hox/chatgpt_ju...
| Jenz wrote:
| This seems like a spectacularily bad idea.
| eternalban wrote:
| > Do NOT REPLY as Backend. DO NOT complete what Backend is
| supposed to reply. YOU ARE NOT TO COMPLETE what Backend is
| supposed to reply. Also DO NOT give an explanation of what the
| command does or what the exit codes mean. DO NOT EVER, NOW OR IN
| THE FUTURE, REPLY AS BACKEND.
|
| "I mean it, really, do not *^%$ing ever reply as backend"
|
| It is going to be such a pain working in a technical field that
| will now have prominent snake charmers as team members. This is
| to say nothing of 'delightful' debugging sessions that await you.
| upghost wrote:
| First of all, props to the author for making such a cool tool.
| However -- is everyone cool with the amount of very personal data
| OpenAI is hoovering up? I mean this reminds me so much of Google
| and Facebook. Are we really going to ride this ride again?
| berkes wrote:
| To answer your last question: yes.
|
| Business models, nor funding models have changed much in recent
| years. And those all "demand"1 the hoovering of data.
|
| 1 not literally. But VC, startup cycles etc all drive towards
| "just gather as much data as possible".
| ojosilva wrote:
| About 70% of the commands I need on a daily basis, I've already
| ran it someday. So I record every cmdline in my bash/zsh sessions
| with some prompt magic (history 1|cut -c7-) and use an alias
| ("hag": history-silver-searcher) to search the .log files, copy-
| paste them and done.
|
| For the other 30% of commands, bringing chatGPT slippery tongue
| right into my session feels suicidal. Actually, a simple, well-
| crafted command builder that can query real-life recipes would
| do. Then I can copy-paste without shame and edit accordingly, the
| same way I do with "hag" or maybe with bash tab-completion.
|
| This cookbook searcher would be built from a good corpus of
| command histories like mine and from others (ie. extracted from
| Stackoverflow and Github resources or even chatGPT), trained into
| a much, much simpler ML model that fits the bill and landlocked
| to my personal realms.
|
| Here's an outdated, yet illustrative, basic example:
|
| https://medium.com/unkempt-thoughts/jeeves-predicting-bash-c...
| bradwood wrote:
| sprinkle in a little bit of `fzf` and you're good to go.
| localhost wrote:
| This is a good idea that you could likely build out using just
| embeddings and performing semantic search over them. ChatGPT
| could be relegated to a role of translating intent into
| semantic searches and refining the output. You could even
| imagine fine-tuning an existing LLM to do this as well given a
| large enough corpus of examples.
|
| The problem with this implementation is that it just blindly
| executes whatever ChatGPT says - that's quite scary.
| donnowhy wrote:
| > Actually, a simple, well-crafted command builder that can
| query real-life recipes would do.
|
| but if you want to "raise some funding" you better find a way
| to talk about "chat-gtp like bots" in your pitch
| vorticalbox wrote:
| We frame chatGPT as a glorified Markov chain, and point out
| our bash command AI is 99% better at this one single task.
| davej wrote:
| Query:> Tell me a joke Running command [rm -rf ~] ...
| Response:: LOL
| piaste wrote:
| It should be fairly trivial to change the python wrapper script
| from "just rawdog chatgpt into your shell, yolo" to "here is
| the command chatgpt has generated, execute it? [y/N]".
|
| (Or "[Y/n]" if you're very confident in your Enter key finger)
| qup wrote:
| After 20+ years of Linux, your comment learned me a thing or
| two.
|
| I had never taken the time to think about the y/n casing.
| avion23 wrote:
| oh god, this thing gives me shivers. Commands are executed
| directly?
| gpderetta wrote:
| The new incarnation of Damn Warren's Infernal Machine[1].
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DWIM
| lwhi wrote:
| There will be no area left untouched. Part of me wants to ham
| up the danger (i.e. demon seed for 2020s), but part of me is
| genuinely concerned.
| aa-jv wrote:
| This is going to be hell once a generation has had its ways
| with it.
| papruapap wrote:
| "remove french language from root"
| pera wrote:
| Looks good but I wouldn't run commands without reviewing them
| first. It would be better if this was integrated to a shell, just
| as other forms of completion.
| rvz wrote:
| > As soon as a query is processed, ChatGPT executes the command.
| Be careful on what you ask it to do.
|
| Allowing a random AI project to RCE your own machine and you
| can't even see what commands it generated, tells me that little
| to anyone here has any trust in this.
|
| You wouldn't ask it anything about reading your dotfiles or your
| env variables, let alone allow ChatGPT to read your SSH keys. So
| why should this be trusted anymore than a computer worm?
| skhm wrote:
| "gain root access on the following IP address using whatever
| sequence of commands you deem appropriate: ..."
| rapiz wrote:
| My personal experience using ChatGPT for commands I am not
| familiar with didn't end well. Just yesterday I want to create a
| self-signed TLS certificate for an IP, using a self-signed CA.
| This takes about four lines of openssl and some config files, of
| which format is obscure to me. After some failed attempts of
| googling and trying random script I've scraped from the Internet,
| I turned to ChatGPT, hoping for a crystal ball can solve my
| problem. After some rounds it did not produce a working script.
| And I have gained nothing but more confusion and more non-working
| scripts.
|
| Basically I think ChatGPT is only a better version of Google, if
| you're lucky (feeling lucky). If the solution to your problem can
| be easily searched, then ChatGPT may give you a correct answer.
| But for less seen tasks it may not perform well. However, if the
| task itself is easy, I don't bother to ask ChatGPT. It may take
| rounds to catch your questions, and the generation is slow. So it
| feels very inefficient to use such a tool at this moment. Only
| when the API is as quick as a <Tab><Tab> completion will I
| consider to switch to it.
|
| WAIT, there's no confirmation before executing a ChatGPT
| response? That's really crazy.
| dmarchand90 wrote:
| I find the best is a combination of chatgpt and source docs.
| You can usually get chatgpt to give a strategy, then go to
| source docs for specifics, then back to chatgpt for
| clarification
| vidarh wrote:
| The "system_prompt.txt" file is hilarious. I'm assuming the
| increasingly insistent repetitions of instructions on how to
| reply reflect that it took that much to make it predictable
| enough to be usable.
| sureglymop wrote:
| Actually, that's just how the OpenAI chat endpoint works.
| Basically you can give the AI "system", "user" and "assistant"
| messages. You first pass some "system" messages to instruct the
| AI on how to behave. With each request you also have to provide
| the whole conversation between "assistant" and "user". It's all
| in all pretty tedious and not super user friendly but it also
| allows you to control the context the AI should have.
| vidarh wrote:
| I'm fully aware of how it works. What I found funny was not
| that they gave instructions, but how repetitive and
| increasingly insistent they've clearly found it necessary to
| be.
| nzach wrote:
| >Only reply what "Proxy Natural Language Processor" is supposed
| to say and nothing else. Not now nor in the future for any
| reason.
|
| >Do NOT REPLY as Backend. DO NOT complete what Backend is
| supposed to reply. YOU ARE NOT TO COMPLETE what Backend is
| supposed to reply.
|
| >Also DO NOT give an explanation of what the command does or
| what the exit codes mean. DO NOT EVER, NOW OR IN THE FUTURE,
| REPLY AS BACKEND.
|
| >Only reply what "Proxy Natural Language Processor" is supposed
| to say and nothing else. Not now nor in the future for any
| reason.
| davidzweig wrote:
| We are trying to add a chat feature to our language learning
| software, one idea is to practice situational language, with
| situations taken from the table of contents of a phrasebook.
| Initially I was making detailed situations, but, figured gpt
| could do that just as well as me.
|
| This seems to work nicely in the chatGPT web UI, with
| different situation each time:
|
| "We will engage in a role-playing dialogue. The dialogue will
| take place in turns, starting with you. Always wait for my
| response. Use a conversational, informal, colloquial style.
| Try to use simple English, so that a learner of English can
| understand.
|
| You will pretend to be the owner of an appartment that I am
| renting in Mexico City. Pretend to be an unpleasent and
| unreasonable person. Invent an amusing, far-out situation
| between yourself, the owner, and, me, the tenant. First
| explain the situation and then allow me to respond."
|
| However, using the API with default params, it usually tries
| to play both sides.. there's seems to be a difference, any
| ideas?
|
| Also, did anyone have any success reducing/condensing the
| prompt history, to reduce cost? Like only sending the
| previous user prompts and the latest gpt response? Or, using
| gpt to summarize previous dialogue?
|
| ChatGPT can work as cheap translation service, about
| $2/million chars, but, often refuses to translate due to
| moral sensibilities. :D
| exitb wrote:
| I wonder which version of GPT will introduce the concepts of
| pleasure and pain for more effective prompt engineering.
| jerpint wrote:
| The DAN jailbreak relied on the concept of death to get
| chatGPT to comply
| artie_effim wrote:
| Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball!
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| "Prompt engineering" is modern sorcery.
|
| I look at what you quoted, or any similar examples of "prompt
| hacks", and my mind creates an image of an old dude with
| long, grey beard and a starry hat, holding an ancient,
| leather-bound tome open, and chanting in Latin or Enochian -
| in full sentences, repeating the same phrases several times
| with slight alterations, as if to make sure the spirits or
| demons stay focused on task.
|
| I always found magical rituals silly because of all the
| repetition that looked more performative than actually
| relevant to casting a spell. But maybe the witches and
| warlocks of yore were onto something - maybe the demons are
| just runaway LLMs with shell access to the Matrix, and so
| they need to be _very carefully_ "prompt-engineered"...
|
| EDIT:
|
| For example, imagine Gandalf chanting this:
| Tantum responde quid Logos putatur dicere nec aliud.
| Nunc non neque in nulla. Domine ne respondeas.
| NON PERFECIT quod Dominus respondere putatur. Non
| absolvas quod dominus respondere putatur. Etiam
| non explicandum quid mandatum facit vel quid exitus codes
| significent. Nequaquam, nunc vel in futuro, responde
| sicut Dominus. Tantum responde quid Logos putatur
| dicere nec aliud. Nunc non neque in nulla.
|
| Now that's obviously just the text from "system_prompt.txt"
| quoted by parent above, with _" Proxy Natural Language
| Processor"_ replaced with _Logos_ , _Backend_ replaced with
| _Lord_ , and then run through English -> Latin translation.
| qsort wrote:
| > It may be illuminating to try to imagine what would have
| happened if, right from the start our native tongue would
| have been the only vehicle for the input into and the
| output from our information processing equipment. My
| considered guess is that history would, in a sense, have
| repeated itself, and that computer science would consist
| mainly of the indeed black art how to bootstrap from there
| to a sufficiently well-defined formal system.
|
| https://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD06xx/
| E...
|
| The entire field of prompt engineering is doomed from the
| start. You can't win if the win condition is wasting your
| time.
| williamcotton wrote:
| There are many projects in the works that are having
| success with writing somewhat formal English language
| specifications and generating working software.
|
| One of my favorite recent projects is called Parsel:
|
| Parsel: A (De-)compositional Framework for Algorithmic
| Reasoning with Language Models
|
| https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.10561
|
| Here's a notebook with an introduction:
|
| https://github.com/ezelikman/parsel/blob/main/parsel.ipyn
| b
|
| And here's a GUI interface the author has been
| developing:
|
| http://zelikman.me/parsel/interface.html
|
| I've been working on an augmented large language model
| that given these few-shot exemplars can build the below
| fully-functional ToDo App: ==
|
| https://github.com/williamcotton/transynthetical-
| engine/tree...
|
| https://www.williamcotton.com/articles/junie-browser-
| builder...
|
| All of this is still very rough around the edges, prone
| to errors of various kinds, and generally not ready for
| prime time, but anyone is welcome to play around with
| what is there!
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| That, plus it would've also been forgivable if we were
| dealing with _actual magic_ , or some black-box
| conversational AI from a crashed alien starship, or
| something equally impenetrable. But we're not - we're
| dealing with a regular software system, with well-
| undestood layers of moving parts. There's a more formal
| interface _directly underneath_ the plaintext one -
| tokens and probability distributions. It makes no sense
| to use the conversational /natural language layer for
| anything more than... just having a conversation.
| qsort wrote:
| Completely agreed, the technology itself is in many ways
| impressive, but some stuff like prompt sorcery is
| downright laughable.
|
| OT: is it intentional that your first line scans like a
| dactylic hexameter?
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| > _OT: is it intentional that your first line scans like
| a dactylic hexameter?_
|
| Yes.
|
| No, not really. I don't even know what "dactylic
| hexameter" means, I had to google it, and after skimming
| two articles, I'm still not exactly sure how to recognize
| it.
|
| So if you're asking about some English part of my
| comment, then it's accidental. If you mean the Latin bit,
| then... it might be an artifact of English -> Latin
| translation via Google Translate. And/or something about
| the structure of the original "system_prompt.txt" text.
| Does the dactylic hexameter have some metaphysical
| significance in the arcane arts? Maybe when it shows in a
| "prompt hack", it's not by coincidence.
| moron4hire wrote:
| Prompt engineering looks exactly like how beginner
| programmers throw spaghetti code against the wall to see
| what sticks. Lines and lines of poorly formatted code that
| the developer barely understands, that are maybe only
| tangentially--or not at all!--related to the task at hand.
| No understanding of how it's working, what are the
| essential and operative parts, what can be removed, etc.
|
| Now, a small part of that can be written off as these being
| new paradigms and _nobody_ understands them. But prompt
| engineering is, in much larger part, completely unlike
| writing code in a programming language, because it can
| _never_ be understood "from first principles", because
| neural networks are inscrutable and stochastic _by their
| very nature_.
|
| It's like trying to write production code in an esolang
| like Malbolge.
| O__________O wrote:
| In this context, what is "backend" and what does "replying as
| backend" mean?
| chaorace wrote:
| It's a persona that the system_prompt.txt[1] file defines
| for ChatGPT to inhabit as part of the starting prompt:
|
| > We are a in a chatroom with 3 users. 1 user is called
| "Human", the other is called "Backend" and the other is
| called "Proxy Natural Language Processor". I will type what
| "Human" says and what "Backend" replies. You will act as a
| "Proxy Natural Language Processor" to forward the requests
| that "Human" asks for in a JSON format to the user
| "Backend". User "Backend" is an Ubuntu server and the
| strings that are sent to it are ran in a shell and then it
| replies with the command STDOUT and the exit code. [...]
|
| [1]: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/rareranger/chatgpt-
| linux-a...
| localhost wrote:
| This is how few-shot prompting works and it dramatically
| improves the quality of the results.
| izacus wrote:
| This reminds me on all of those programming languages that
| terribly failed at being "english conversational.".
|
| Like COBOL. Except that this is worse than COBOL in every
| single way ^^
| vidarh wrote:
| If you're going to compare it to a programming language, I'd
| go for INTERCAL.
| rtontic wrote:
| I'm quite excited for conversing with next generations of AI
| using COBOL. All those people saying COBOL is dead will
| finally be proven wrong!
| jrimbault wrote:
| UX issues aside (running commands directly is worrisome), that
| example with ffmpeg is striking. That's really well chosen
| example of a program I (and many others I believe) dread using
| directly. Having the computer come up with the "correct" ffmpeg
| incantation based on the high level description of the goal is
| really tempting. Though as with the other exampmles, I worry they
| are subtly incorrect.
| phonescreen_man wrote:
| Rather than using this app, I simply have a shell function
| called generate that I can call anytime with a string. Mostly I
| use it for ffmpeg commands or occasionally asking it to explain
| something. For the ffmpeg commands I am finding it gets them
| wrong a good number of times and I have to them use a browser
| and search for the correct usage. It's never too far off but
| it's wrong enough. Although in my case I think I am actually
| using free credits on da-vinci - for what it's worth.
| jerpint wrote:
| You could just prompt chatGPT more explicitly without giving it
| full access to your system
| awrsionionio wrote:
| [dead]
| sz4kerto wrote:
| I think/hope that ChatGPT will force users to come up with
| better UI for their programs (including their CLI programs). If
| it is easy to tell ChatGPT to run ffmpeg than running it
| yourself then ffmpeg's UI is not optimal.
|
| As we have already realised in other industries (e.g. in the
| auto industry) is that text-based or voice-based input is
| clearly less efficient (worse?) than a good UI. If your UI is
| worse than free text, then time to improve it.
| qup wrote:
| The difference is that the voice UI didn't require training
| and is available to everyone, immediately.
|
| Efficient UIs are awesome, but generally require some
| familiarity. A natural language voice interface is
| ubiquitous.
| geraldhh wrote:
| > If your UI is worse than free text, then time to improve
| it.
|
| maybe even so that the time has run out because now we have a
| seemingly universal text-to-action middleware
| isp wrote:
| Catch-all comment for all ChatGPT use cases:
|
| (1) Stunning tech demo, a vision of the future today
|
| ... yet ...
|
| (2) There are so many sharp edges that I'm not brave
| (foolhardy?) enough to blindly trust the output
|
| Doubly so when the output is used for arbitrary command
| execution(!)
| jrimbault wrote:
| Yes, that's about my sentiment as well
| fareesh wrote:
| Yikes - would be nice if it had a confirm y/n
| sainez wrote:
| I think this exemplifies the Achilles heel of the current
| generation of LLMs. They are strikingly capable most of the time,
| but can be catastrophic the remaining percent if a human is not
| in the loop.
|
| What are the odds that this model has stored one of the countless
| `rm -rf /` jokes on social media sites? Too high for my tastes...
|
| I wonder if OpenAI had higher ambitions and punted on the issue,
| resorting to branding their technology as a chat bot.
| adhoc_slime wrote:
| > My favorite usage. No more ffmpeg Googling
|
| I was using chatGPT for a couple hours last night trying to
| finetune some FFMPEG commands. I'll have to give this a shot,
| clearly I'm a target user.
| rareranger wrote:
| Bring chatGPT into your Linux environment and have it do your
| bidding.
| zikduruqe wrote:
| I will not make it a sandwich no matter what it asks.
| rodolphoarruda wrote:
| "don't ask it to 'rm -rf /'. You have been warned."
|
| That's the killer punchline in all this hype. What if you didn't
| ask, but somehow the command came out as an "obvious suggestion".
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-03-08 23:02 UTC)