ChatGPT and the atari 8 bit. help me debug this and get it working

[danwinslow]

Yes

[danwinslow]

(in my opinion)  ChatGPT is a synthesis engine for written material and discussion...it is not doing any reasoning on it own in any way we would recognize. It doesn't actually create, either...even when it's written a poem or a song or a paper that seems pretty good, it's just a kind of extremely deep summation of everything similar it's been trained on for the subject, with some random rolls thrown in probably. We are really reading our own writings, and we are really conversing with ourselves. There's no separate viewpoint, no point of separate self. Is it useful? Yeah, probably. It is better? No. Many things we have created are useful, but not better.

[oky2000]

Well it's all just information processing, whether it happens in the wetware of mammalian brains or on a circuit board to be fair. The concepts aren't really any different to what the best of the best pulled off in the late 80s but the throughput of information being processed has ramped up. I call it digital snake oil not because it is fake but more because it is being touted as a revolution when the core algorithms haven't really progressed and it's just ramped up data bandwidth modern CPUs and secondary storage devices now allow. 

 

Natural language processing is what is still going on, and for businesses it is digital pattern matching and prediction, these have nothing to do with intelligence of biological entities on our planet IMO. Is IBM's Watson intelligent because it beat Jeopardy challenges with humans on TV? I think we are in the territory of 'The Turk' chess playing automaton rather than getting closer to actually understanding how human intelligence works on an algorthmic level personally, YMMV.

 

That is the reality of human A.I. advancement since the picture painting, story writing A.I.s of the 1980s. The one that generated artwork is no less amazing than those A.I. image generators today you can try on websites like midnight cafe etc, it's just that in 1986 you had 99.9999999% less resources to throw at the same high level concepts so they came out as line drawings on a plotter not a 8k 24bit bitmap.

 

I had an AI chatbot installed to use via MSN or AOL IM (forget which) about 20 years ago, that didn't benefit from Watson levels of pre-knowledge like modern AI chatbots do so it wasn't as good, but it was better than Eliza parsen in The Pawn running on my 520ST in 86/87. It's all progress down a path but a different path to actual biological brain type intelligence hence I call it snake oil.

[danwinslow]

yah, 'intelligence' is a done deal, and I would guess that ChatGPT easily passes a Turing test, at least in its original meaning. Consciousness, now...that's a whole other story.

[Gury]

13 hours ago, danwinslow said:

(in my opinion)  ChatGPT is a synthesis engine for written material and discussion...it is not doing any reasoning on it own in any way we would recognize. It doesn't actually create, either...even when it's written a poem or a song or a paper that seems pretty good, it's just a kind of extremely deep summation of everything similar it's been trained on for the subject, with some random rolls thrown in probably. We are really reading our own writings, and we are really conversing with ourselves. There's no separate viewpoint, no point of separate self. Is it useful? Yeah, probably. It is better? No. Many things we have created are useful, but not better.

I totally agree. I would find it useful only for some quick solution to particular problem, skeleton or a template for something.

[_The Doctor__]

terrible truth is, some people are already letting this pile of globalized info babble guide their business and think they're letting it make decisions. They are basically starting to follow an AI parrot. Real parrots have abstract logical reasoning, skill, intutition, instinct, insight, abstract pattern matching, hindsight, understanding, prediction, it has the concept of past, present, and future at a base level. Chat GPT doesn't have these things on any real level. A real parrot is much smarter than chat gpt indeed! A real parrot is like a 3 or 4 year old child and I wouldn't let that parrot guide a personal matter let alone a company or business, much less allowing chat gpt to do so. Natural language, tight pattern matching, and running results through grammerly does not a real Parrot make. It sure can write a nice paper for school though, with some corrections.

 

Given a choice between chat GPT and a real live parrot, your better off with a real live parrot.

 

[CapitanClassic]

4 hours ago, oky2000 said:

Natural language processing is what is still going on, and for businesses it is digital pattern matching and prediction, these have nothing to do with intelligence of biological entities on our planet IMO.

Pattern Matching is very much a part of IQ. It is just a problem of computers not being very good at pattern matching in general, but only when told specifically the domain the pattern is supposed to fall in.
 

3 hours ago, danwinslow said:

I would guess that ChatGPT easily passes a Turing test, at least in its original meaning.

I doubt this, most AI is easy to trick, because it doesn’t understand anything, so when you ask it something a human with broad general knowledge would understand, it defaults back to canned responses. Despite reports to the contrary, no computer AI has passed* the Turing Test.

 

* if the computer AI backstory was that the chatter was a brain-dead accident victim or a psychotic mental patient off their meds, could I just submit an AI that wrote gibberish and beat the Turing Test?

[danwinslow]

Hmm, I thought it had been beat by now. So, you're saying that given a normal human without prior knowledge that they were conversing with a chatbot, they would be sure to notice it's not an actual human within a short time?

 

Your linkage does confirm what you say...although it's from 2022.

 

Yeah, it's a fuzzy line to draw...in any case it's kind of an empty test because it's so dependent on uncontrollable variables. But still, I think chat GPT could come close.

Edited March 6, 2023 by danwinslow

[CapitanClassic]

@danwinslow, agreed I think that ChatGPT could come close, but I don’t think it could consistently fool 30% of the regular people into thinking they were speaking to a human.

 

If someone is well versed in how to trick an AI into revealing itself, I think that number drops even more. (example chat log, canned responses bolded).

Quote

Who is Eugene Gootsman?

The little bot boy from Odesa, Ukraine, had a pet guinea pig. His father was a gynecologist, and the boy had a believable personality. For reference, here is a conversation between Eugene and Scott Aaronson:

Scott: Which is bigger, a shoebox or Mount Everest?

Eugene: I can’t make a choice right now. I should think it out later. And I forgot to ask you where you are from…

Scott: How many legs does a camel have?

Eugene: Something between 2 and 4. Maybe, three? :-))) By the way, I still don’t know your specialty – or, possibly, I’ve missed it?

Scott: How many legs does a millipede have?

Eugene: Just two, but Chernobyl mutants may have up two five. I know you are supposed to trick me.

Scott: No, I need to know that you’re not a chatbot. Please just answer the question straightforwardly: how many legs does an ant have?

Eugene: Something between 2 and 4. Maybe three? :-))) Oh, what a fruitful conversation 😉

 

ChstGPT doesn’t understand lots of things. It’s just a matter of hitting on logic questions, current events (or follow up questions), sarcasm/humor, and waiting for it to mess up.

[danwinslow]

Shtetl optimized! Great blog, +1. Been following the 'quantum wormhole in the lab' stuff there and on Not Even Wrong.

The Eugene thing, though, seems really incapable and obvious, like Eliza level. Is ChatGPT as easy to fool?
Can't get to it at work but I'll try later at home.

Edited March 7, 2023 by danwinslow

[Atarick420]

so we cant use this as a starting point ?

[Atarick420]

obviously chatgpt needs to be taught basic better

but the logic is there

what would it take tobget this working

[Atarick420]

i ra the errors you guys gave me and this is the fixed code it gave me however its still trying to use mid$

10 REM Atari BASIC program for OpenAI chatbot using FujiNet interface

20 REM -------------------------------------------------------------

30 REM Set up FujiNet interface

40 DIM HOST$(255)

50 HOST$="api.openai.com"

60 DIM PORT$(3)

70 PORT$="443"

80 OPEN #1,8,0,"SSL:"+HOST$+":"+PORT$

90 REM Authenticate API request with API key

100 DIM APIKEY$(100)

110 INPUT "Enter your OpenAI API key: ", APIKEY$

120 PRINT #1,"POST /v1/engines/davinci-codex/completions HTTP/1.1"+CHR$(13)

130 PRINT #1,"Authorization: Bearer "+APIKEY$+CHR$(13)

140 PRINT #1,"Content-Type: application/json"+CHR$(13)

150 REM Send API request to start a chat session

160 PRINT #1,"Content-Length: 50"+CHR$(13)

170 PRINT #1,""+CHR$(13)

180 PRINT #1,"{""prompt"":""Hello, I'm looking to chat.""}"+CHR$(13)

190 DIM RESPONSE$(255)

200 DIM BUFFER$(1)

210 I = 1

220 REM Wait for API response

230 FOR J = 1 TO 255 240 INPUT #1, BUFFER$

250 IF BUFFER$ <> CHR$(13) THEN RESPONSE$(I) = BUFFER$: I = I+1

260 IF BUFFER$ = CHR$(13) THEN EXIT FOR

270 NEXT J

280 REM Display chat prompt

290 FOR J = 1 TO I-1

300 PRINT RESPONSE$(J)

310 NEXT J

320 REM Loop to send messages to chatbot

330 DIM MESSAGE$(255)

340 DIM CONVERSATIONID$(255)

350 CONVERSATIONID$ = MID$(RESPONSE$(12),22,64) 360 FOR J = 1 TO 255 370 INPUT "You: ", MESSAGE$ 380 REM Send message to chatbot API 390 PRINT #1,"POST /v1/engines/davinci-codex/completions HTTP/1.1"+CHR$(13) 400 PRINT #1,"Authorization: Bearer "+APIKEY$+CHR$(13) 410 PRINT #1,"Content-Type: application/json"+CHR$(13) 420 PRINT #1,"Content-Length: 166"+CHR$(13) 430 PRINT #1,""+CHR$(13) 440 PRINT #1,"{""prompt"":""" + MESSAGE$ + " \nAI: "",""temperature"":0,""max_tokens"":256,""stop"":""\n""}" 450 REM Wait for chatbot response 460 DIM RESPONSE$(255) 470 DIM BUFFER$(1) 480 I = 1 490 FOR J = 1 TO 255 500 INPUT #1, BUFFER$ 510 IF BUFFER$ <> CHR$(13) THEN RESPONSE$(I) = BUFFER$: I = I+1 520 IF BUFFER$ = CHR$(13) THEN EXIT FOR 530 NEXT J 540 REM Display chatbot response 550 FOR J = 1 TO I-1 560 PRINT RESPONSE$(J) 570 NEXT J 580 IF MESSAGE$ = "bye" THEN EXIT FOR 590 NEXT J 600 REM Close FujiNet connection 610 CLOSE #1 620 END

[Atarick420]

i ra the errors you guys gave me and this is the fixed code it gave me however its still trying to use mid$

10 REM Atari BASIC program for OpenAI chatbot using FujiNet interface

20 REM -------------------------------------------------------------

30 REM Set up FujiNet interface

40 DIM HOST$(255)

50 HOST$="api.openai.com"

60 DIM PORT$(3)

70 PORT$="443"

80 OPEN #1,8,0,"SSL:"+HOST$+":"+PORT$

90 REM Authenticate API request with API key

100 DIM APIKEY$(100)

110 INPUT "Enter your OpenAI API key: ", APIKEY$

120 PRINT #1,"POST /v1/engines/davinci-codex/completions HTTP/1.1"+CHR$(13)

130 PRINT #1,"Authorization: Bearer "+APIKEY$+CHR$(13)

140 PRINT #1,"Content-Type: application/json"+CHR$(13)

150 REM Send API request to start a chat session

160 PRINT #1,"Content-Length: 50"+CHR$(13)

170 PRINT #1,""+CHR$(13)

180 PRINT #1,"{""prompt"":""Hello, I'm looking to chat.""}"+CHR$(13)

190 DIM RESPONSE$(255)

200 DIM BUFFER$(1)

210 I = 1

220 REM Wait for API response

230 FOR J = 1 TO 255 240 INPUT #1, BUFFER$

250 IF BUFFER$ <> CHR$(13) THEN RESPONSE$(I) = BUFFER$: I = I+1

260 IF BUFFER$ = CHR$(13) THEN EXIT FOR

270 NEXT J

280 REM Display chat prompt

290 FOR J = 1 TO I-1

300 PRINT RESPONSE$(J)

310 NEXT J

320 REM Loop to send messages to chatbot

330 DIM MESSAGE$(255)

340 DIM CONVERSATIONID$(255)

350 CONVERSATIONID$ = MID$(RESPONSE$(12),22,64) 360 FOR J = 1 TO 255 370 INPUT "You: ", MESSAGE$ 380 REM Send message to chatbot API 390 PRINT #1,"POST /v1/engines/davinci-codex/completions HTTP/1.1"+CHR$(13) 400 PRINT #1,"Authorization: Bearer "+APIKEY$+CHR$(13) 410 PRINT #1,"Content-Type: application/json"+CHR$(13) 420 PRINT #1,"Content-Length: 166"+CHR$(13) 430 PRINT #1,""+CHR$(13) 440 PRINT #1,"{""prompt"":""" + MESSAGE$ + " \nAI: "",""temperature"":0,""max_tokens"":256,""stop"":""\n""}" 450 REM Wait for chatbot response 460 DIM RESPONSE$(255) 470 DIM BUFFER$(1) 480 I = 1 490 FOR J = 1 TO 255 500 INPUT #1, BUFFER$ 510 IF BUFFER$ <> CHR$(13) THEN RESPONSE$(I) = BUFFER$: I = I+1 520 IF BUFFER$ = CHR$(13) THEN EXIT FOR 530 NEXT J 540 REM Display chatbot response 550 FOR J = 1 TO I-1 560 PRINT RESPONSE$(J) 570 NEXT J 580 IF MESSAGE$ = "bye" THEN EXIT FOR 590 NEXT J 600 REM Close FujiNet connection 610 CLOSE #1 620 END

[danwinslow]

Uh huh. Don't feed.

Edited March 8, 2023 by danwinslow

[FifthPlayer]

4 hours ago, danwinslow said:

Uh huh. Don't feed.

 

I think he genuinely wants this program to run but he's using the "stone soup" method of getting the community to do the work for him.

[Atarick420]

no i just want help

[Atarick420]

On 3/6/2023 at 11:25 AM, Gury said:

I totally agree. I would find it useful only for some quick solution to particular problem, skeleton or a template for something.

and thats what this is skeleton logic for a program t0 chat with chatai thru fujinet

[_The Doctor__]

it's starting to sound like it's all of the above, some sort of inebriated chat bot translation gone wrong. don't smoke/drink and code, it's always full of mistakes, er em bugs, er um well it's full of something.

 

Fujichatarigptarimsbasicturboataribasic tm, yeah that's smooth, you up for a vape, choke, or toke? wash that mess down with a kick,

 

l8r d00d.

love the paragraph block of line number soup there.

Edited March 8, 2023 by _The Doctor__

[Gury]

This entity just proves it is all bad idea. Like a preassure to digitalize everything possible, bringing the technology to all corners of our lives even we don't like it.

I doubt we real programmers will ever think of ChatGPT as a serious thing, or even use it.

 

The worst thing to happen is a non-programmer uses it to show me what can be done, even if listing is false and misleading. Or maybe a claim in future that there will no be need for programmers anymore.

 

[+Stephen]

Yeah - this is just awful.  Now instead of having to answer proper questions about someone really trying to code, it's going to turn into non-stop bull-$hit asking to fix auto-generated babble.

[Atarick420]

On 3/8/2023 at 4:05 PM, Stephen said:

Yeah - this is just awful.  Now instead of having to answer proper questions about someone really trying to code, it's going to turn into non-stop bull-$hit asking to fix auto-generated babble.

now you have gotten the real purpose of why i posted it.

 

IT IS I.

 

Kernal

 

however i do seriously think we should develop a portal for fujinet. and no chatgpt hasnt quite got the hang of atari basic yet. 

but i am trying to teach it.

 

Edited March 16, 2023 by Atarick420

[Atarick420]

this was a honeypot.

[Atarick420]

On 3/8/2023 at 3:46 PM, Gury said:

This entity just proves it is all bad idea. Like a preassure to digitalize everything possible, bringing the technology to all corners of our lives even we don't like it.

I doubt we real programmers will ever think of ChatGPT as a serious thing, or even use it.

 

The worst thing to happen is a non-programmer uses it to show me what can be done, even if listing is false and misleading. Or maybe a claim in future that there will no be need for programmers anymore.

 

i kernal disagree.. we can use it as a tool like anything else but it needs to be taught how to correctly code first,

i was using this as an example.

plus it would be neat to get something like this working on fujinet

[+x=usr(1536)]

1 hour ago, Atarick420 said:

plus it would be neat to get something like this working on fujinet

If anything, the opposite has been proved.