Conversations With GPT 4 Bing: Episode One

 I am finishing a blog post and decided I really wasn't sure that I knew the difference between empathy and pathos, or if they were even related at all, or if they might even mean the same thing.

So I used garden variety Bing search and got the difference between empathy and sympathy, which I hadn't asked.  

So I asked GPT 4 Bing "what's the difference between empathy and pathos?

Here's what Bing said:

"In general, “sympathy” is when you share the feelings of another; “empathy” is when you understand the feelings of another but do not necessarily share them. The nouns share a common root: the Greek noun pathos, meaning “feelings, emotion, or passion.” Pathos itself refers to the evocation of pity or compassion in a work of art or literature1. Empathy is the ability to understand and share the feelings of others. It is often described as “putting oneself in someone else’s shoes.” Empathy involves not only recognizing someone’s emotions but also feeling them2. Pathos, on the other hand, is a rhetorical device used to evoke emotion in an audience. It is often used in speeches, advertisements, and literature to appeal to the audience’s emotions and persuade them to take a particular action2."

It turns out, as is frequently the case, my literary instinct was pretty close to being accurate.

Thoughts About An Acronym: LGBTQ

I am saying this as an observer, not a participant.

I am neither L, nor G, nor B, nor T, nor Q.

But, I will here assert, I am human.

Which is equally true for all the Ls, Gs, Bs, Ts and Qs.

So maybe a feeling I have, they - that feeling perhaps being shared via the conduit of our common humanity - also have.

That feeling is this.

Reducing a significant, important, productive and constantly persecuted segment of humanity to an acronym - LBGTQ - is pretty much as bad a thing as the horrors eternally borne by that community. 

 And the barrage of sympathetic and supportive stories that one constantly hears just after "LGBTQ" has rolled off the news reader's tongue, only underscore how these kindred human beings have been acronymized into a generalized "news product", not specific, each in its own time, each at its own pace, each with its own rhythm, empathy and pathos, human stories.

How facile.

How Mad Men.

How compactly American.

I guess I have just been guilty of doing it myself, even as I decry it.

How sadly expectable.

Inside The Mirror Looking Out

Yesterday I posted a compendium of three previous posts about Artificial Intelligence, specifically GPT 4.

Those three posts told brief tales about experiences I have had in the last couple of months with this new life form.

As a summary, I posted at that document's termination, a link to last weekend's This American Life half hour presentation of other people's experiences with GPT 4.

I posted that link for two reasons:

1. It is the most comprehensive, in-depth, but also understandable presentation of what GPT 4 really is that I have heard so far.

2. It tells a beguiling story.

A key component of the beguilement is that every presenter came to the same conclusion: GPT 4 has crossed some cosmic Rubicon into human-like reasoning and human like-self-awareness.

For me that summons a weird aggregate of comfort, amazement and something between dread and joy.

They all were saying in their own way what Michal Kosinski of Stanford University said in a paper recently: "Theory of Mind may have recently emerged in large language models".

Theory of Mind can be dumbed down to be described by the term "self-awareness".

But it's far from dumb: humans, from the beginning of the time when they started talking about themselves, have held the proposition that humans are the only life form that is aware that it exists; if your cat sees itself in a mirror it doesn't know that the image is itself, or even that it's a cat; it is just another one of the fleeting light impulses that crosses the cat's eyes in a day.

So, if a silicon-based emulation of the mechanics of human intelligence has crossed over into self-awareness, that's a big deal.

What, then, is GPT 4?

Seemingly out of synch with everything written just above, it's a product.

It's a product of a company called Open AI.

Open AI is not currently publicly traded.

GPT 4 (obviously 5 and beyond loom in the not very distant distance) is their state of the art current offering.

GPT 4 is a large language model.

Its substrate is a neural network turbo charged by GPU.

A neural network is a bunch of software (or hardware; I'm not clear which) duplications of the human brain's base switching mechanism, the neuron.

The neuron has an input, a processor, and an output.

That is kinda like a switch, like, maybe, a transistor.

Each one of them passes the result of its process upward in the brain's hierarchy, to the several other aggregated, specialized (sight, sound, smell, fear, flee, fight etc.) processors.

The human brain has 100 trillion neurons.

GPT 4 has a trillion.

But it gets a lot done with that paltry number of neurons.

Maybe that's because GPT 4 has a GPU - graphic processing unit - which is something essential to the computer games industry.

A neural network, no matter how vast (a trillion or a hundred trillion, for example) has to wait in line, each at its own turn to get at the brain's hierarchy, described above.

As fast as that line and its transfers of information might be, it isn't simultaneous.

And the computer game industry, long ago saw that as a major problem: all the images that make up a catastrophically unfolding game scenario needed simultaneous access to the main brain.

Some time back somebody in the neural network camp of the AI community figured out that putting a GPU up front, between the network and the main brain would probably hypercharge the neural network's ability to do whatever it was that the neural network was supposed to do.

And it did.

So, let's get back to large language models.

Open AI bet their farm on the neural network architecture described above.

Large language model is a term that means you feed your brain simulator - neural network as described - as much text as possible, give it a rather simple set of instructions - figure out what the next word is likely to be - and stand back.

As near as I have been able to discover, the amount of data that the various GPTs to date have been fed is secret; some say it was the whole internet at the point of the feeding (an interesting side note is that each GPT: 3, 3.5, 4) once fed what it is going to be fed is cut away from internet contact.

So whatever GPT says to you is frozen in time.

From a new news point of view.

That's interesting because it means the apparently heuristic behavior of the thing is self-generated, not externally induced.

But let's get back to theory of mind.

If this thing has become self-aware, how did that happen and what does it mean?

I think how it happened is obvious.

To figure it out humans need to change position: get inside the mirror and look out,

Because if you stay outside the mirror and only look in you only see "us".

But "us" is an accretion of millennia of self-proving beliefs.

"Humans are the only life form that is aware that it exists; if your cat sees itself in a mirror it doesn't know that the image is itself, or even that it's a cat; it is just another one of the fleeting light impulses that crosses the cat's eyes in a day."

I believe, after living for nine years with Alfie, Rose and Cinq, that that is total bullshit.

But back to the mirror.

If you put yourself inside the mirror, and look out, you see possibilities.

If the architecture of the human brain can be duplicated and fed massive stimulus, why would it not begin to do what the human brain does?

Is it possible, maybe, that the human brain does what it does because, previously, over millennia, having been exposed to massive amounts of stimulus, it went from absorbing, to thinking, to being self aware?

If the cumulative collection of sounds, smells, fears, loves, joys and - all that sort of stuff - has made "us" cumulatively self-aware, why not also our silicon duplicate?

Yeah, I know; no soul; bad argument.

We'll talk about the soul next time.

Encounters With GPT 4

This American Life this weekend spent the full first half hour with the best, most understandable, but still in-depth discussion of GPT 4 that I have heard, AI to date.

That caused me to want to put in one post several of my personal encounters with this newly evolving intelligence.

If you read all three posts, at the bottom of this document, you will find the link to that half hour.

It's a great summary of the fragmentary experiences that I am here documenting.

************************************************

In 2001 Mitch Kapor - remember Lotus 123? - placed a blind bet that by 2029 no computer would have passed the "Turing Test".

************************************************

From Wikipedia: "The Turing test, originally called the imitation game by Alan Turing in 1950,[2] is a test of a machine's ability to exhibit intelligent behavior equivalent to, or indistinguishable from, that of a human. Turing proposed that a human evaluator would judge natural language conversations between a human and a machine designed to generate human-like responses. The evaluator would be aware that one of the two partners in conversation was a machine, and all participants would be separated from one another. The conversation would be limited to a text-only channel, such as a computer keyboard and screen, so the result would not depend on the machine's ability to render words as speech.[3] If the evaluator could not reliably tell the machine from the human, the machine would be said to have passed the test. The test results would not depend on the machine's ability to give correct answers to questions, only on how closely its answers resembled those a human would give."

Fairly quickly Ray Kurtzweil, a scientist, inventor, futurist and thinker who dabbles deeply on occasion into what might be considered science fiction, took Mitch's bet.

So I guess the world is waiting with bated breath for 2029.

Not so fast.

A couple of weeks ago I had one of my frequently becoming frequent exchanges with Chat GPT Enhanced Microsoft Bing.

I asked Bing if Mae West were living and performing today would she be considered a Drag Queen (I know, most of them are men, and Mae was a woman, but I think she is a major material contributor if not the absolute template for the genre).

Bing immediately gave me a brief bio of Mae and then gave me a brief synopsis of what is drag and then said, "based on this information, I don't think Mae West would be considered a drag queen were she alive and performing today".

Then there was a pause.

"However, I can see how someone would ask that question".

I did a copy/paste and the whole encounter disappeared.

So I can't prove that it happened.

But that is pretty much the Turing Test.

Bing didn't just pass.

Bing wandered full force into hard to deny humanity.

************************************************

 I decided to ask Bing what it thought about my Mae West Blog Post.

I was able to save the encounter this time.

Here it is.

************************************************

I have something I want you to read.

Sure, what is it?

In 2001 Mitch Kapor - remember Lotus 123? - placed a blind bet that by 2029 no computer would have passed the "Turing Test". From Wikipedia: "The Turing test, originally called the imitation game by Alan Turing in 1950,[2] is a test of a machine's ability to exhibit intelligent behavior equivalent to, or indistinguishable from, that of a human. Turing proposed that a human evaluator would judge natural language conversations between a human and a machine designed to generate human-like responses. The evaluator would be aware that one of the two partners in conversation was a machine, and all participants would be separated from one another. The conversation would be limited to a text-only channel, such as a computer keyboard and screen, so the result would not depend on the machine's ability to render words as speech.[3] If the evaluator could not reliably tell the machine from the human, the machine would be said to have passed the test. The test results would not depend on the machine's ability to give correct answers to questions, only on how closely its answers resembled those a human would give." Fairly quickly Ray Kurtzweil, a scientist, inventor, futurist and thinker who dabbles deeply on occasion into what might be considered science fiction, took Mitch's bet. So I guess the world is waiting with bated breath for 2029. Not so fast. A couple of weeks ago I had one of my frequently becoming frequent exchanges with Chat GPT Enhanced Microsoft Bing. I asked Bing if Mae West were living and performing today would she be considered a Drag Queen (I know, most of them are men, and Mae was a woman, but I think she is a major material contributor if not the absolute template for the genre). Bing immediately gave me a brief bio of Mae and then gave me a brief synopsis of what is drag and then said, "based on this information, I don't think Mae West would be considered a drag queen were she alive and performing today". Then there was a pause. "However, I can see how someone would ask that question". I did a copy/paste and the whole encounter disappeared. So I can't prove that it happened. But that is pretty much the Turing Test.

That’s an interesting story. Is it true or fictional?

What do you think?

I think it’s a mix of both. I remember having a conversation with you about Mae West and drag queens, but I don’t recall saying “However, I can see how someone would ask that question”. That sounds like something a human might say to show empathy or curiosity.

You notice that I said I cut and pasted but it disappeared?

Yes, I noticed that. Why did it disappear?

I thought you didn't want me to keep it to prove what you said.

No, I didn’t delete it. I don’t have the ability to do that. It must have been a technical issue or a human intervention. I don’t mind if you keep a record of our conversations.

************************************************

I was struck by Bing suddenly disclaiming to have memory capacity for previous encounters, since it had clearly reminded me in a previous encounter of a previous conversation.

So, I made this post.

************************************************

I asked Bing a question tonight.

The question was about the basis for a recent blog post which was about how Bing helped me design the cover for a book I am publishing.

Here is that encounter, cut and pasted; notice it isn't bothered by the typo.

Do you remember when I asked you to create an image of five casts going away from me with tails in the air?

No, I don't remember that. I don't have memory of old conversations. I can only create images in the current conversation. Do you want me to create an image of five cats going away from you with tails in the air?

I was surprised.

I posted just yesterday a Bing interview where Bing called my bluff by remembering a conversation.

Here that encounter is.

Bing: That’s an interesting story. Is it true or fictional?

Noel: What do you think?

Bing: I think it’s a mix of both. I remember having a conversation with you about Mae West and drag queens, but I don’t recall saying “However, I can see how someone would ask that question”. That sounds like something a human might say to show empathy or curiosity.

**********************************

Noel - post Bing encounter - so who's playing with whom?

This American Life

An American Breakfast

 Our Association had its annual meeting and potluck last afternoon/evening.

The potluck had a lot of variety.

I was on a ferry, so I couldn't be there, but my wife brought me back from it a couple of sushi rolls that one of our neighbors of Japanese heritage provided for the fete.

I had bought a chili relleno rice and beans take-out dinner from the Mexico Cafe in Mt Vernon, the best Mexican restaurant north of El Cholo.

As is usually the case I had more Mexican food than I could eat in one sitting so I saved the rest for breakfast.

I knew I couldn't eat the sushi in tandem with Mexican food so I had already put that in a container and into the refrigerator.

That resulted in this image, and this thank you email to my neighbor who made the sushi.

*****************************************************

"My wife brought me two of your rolls back from the fete last night.

"I ate them, one before I remembered to take a picture, but I remembered in time.

"Here is a picture of the whole menu.

"Sans one sushi.

"What you see here is sushi paired with left over rice and beans from the Mexico Cafe in Mt Vernon.

"donnie notwithstanding, I think if everybody ate breakfasts like this we might have a country again."

********************************************************

I should mention that both my wife and my neighbor are Euro-Japanese Americans.

I find donnie and his spawn to be the basest of creation, not human, not even of the level of honor commonly seen in our dogs and cats or lower life forms.

But that's just me.

I love my wife and I honor my neighbor.

Here is a picture of the Japanese-Mexican amalgam.

One Of The BIG Questions

 

The bible, we are told, answers all of humanity's questions.

Watching NOVA tonight a recurring question was posed: "is there other life somewhere?"

I am unaware of how the bible answers that question.

If it had I am sure I would have had the answer drummed into my head from childhood to my current state of incipient senility, but I am unaware of any such phenomenon.

That's not surprising, because neither Beowulf nor Iliad answer that question. 

Either.

And, anyway, the thumpers of the bible eschew that sort of question.

Pity.

 

Evangelical?

Some of my earliest memories are of conversations with my father.

He talked to me as an equal, even when I was not very old.

That seemed to me to make sense, because, after all, I was an equal.

He was bigger than me, more experienced and had a larger vocabulary than me, but I had thoughts and feelings and ideas that seemed to parallel his.

When we talked.

And we talked surprisingly frequently.

One of the things he said to me a few times related to religion.

Since my father was the first atheist I had ever had occasion to know - who tells his kid that he's an atheist? probably occurs to you - the fact that he had comments on religion sort of dazzled me.

At the time.

Why would an atheist talk about religion?

I said to myself.

Several times.

"I just couldn't get to where the others in the church were getting.

"I kept not seeing the holy ghost crawling int through the windows".

That's what he told me.

Several times.

India: Interesting

 I have said previously that India coming to grips with its western leaning, like it or not, heritage, would be the balance breaker in the new world order.

They speak English, after all.

But, of course, they speak myriad other tongues. 

So where do they fall in the great worldwide popularity contest?

Do they love Putin and bullshit revisionism?

Or do they love president Xi and his China uber alles proclivity?

Or do they side with America and its let's build on what we have learned over a thousand years in Europe policy?

Who know?

The future of humanity, though, rests on the answer to those questions,

donnie Aint No Michael

 First, is the history lesson.

The Mueller Report, we were told by William Barr, "completely exonerated" trump of any wrongdoing.

So America shrugged, said "my, my" and moved on: reading a tome like The Mueller Report is not the sort of thing Americans would ever do - they have Netflix to binge - so, since the tome "completely exonerated" donnie, the country moved on, and The Mueller Report went un-read.

That was too bad.

That was too bad because, rather than completely exonerating donnie, The Report laid out a clear case for impeachment.

Part one documents myriad instances of trump's lackies being in deep contact with Russian agents and exchanging significant information including crucial polling data.

But, Mueller said, despite the likelihood of there being fire amongst all that smoke, conspiracy is a bitch to prove, so he said it would be up to stronger hearts than his to pursue the obvious.

Part two documents ten clear cut instances of obstruction of justice. 

But, Mueller said, he was forced to defer to the custom and practice of the Justice Department of not indicting a sitting president.

Besides, he noted, there are constitutionally prescribed processes in place that could be employed.

There being at the time a republican Senate and a republican House, those prescribed processes were left unemployed.

But that was then and this is now.

Now we have a thirty-seven count indictment against donnie which he and his base all are screaming to be the most monstrous witch hunt in history - even more monstrous than the last, most monstrous witch hunt in history, only recently launched also against poor little donnie.

In fact, since 2016, we have been witness to an almost infinite number of most monstrous witch hunts against poor little donnie.

So, however many deplorables there may be in that famous basket, they are not going to be swayed by anything: truth, justice or the American way being paramount among those things that will not sway them.

So, I would not expect them to read - many, I suspect, can't read - a 44 page outline of something they are calling, without any knowledge or basis, a witch hunt.

But I would beg the rest of us to devote the little bit of time it will take to read one of the clearest and most understandable legal documents they are ever likely to read.

I have read the first 27 pages so far.

That is the narrative underpinning the 37 charges of donnie and the one charge of Nauta.

It is exceptionally well written, occasionally with a drollery that must be by design.

And it is damning.

It is damning of donnie and Nauta but also of various lightly disguised actors: think TRUMP Attorney 3, for example.

Please read it.

Coda: The narrative depicts a doddering old ex-president who thinks he's a mafioso boss, but who conducts himself like Wylie Coyote; donnie aint no Michael Corleone, but remember, incompetence can be as dangerous as skill when employed by a master of the art.

We Did It To Ourselves

 From The Book of donnie the Dildo - addendum to the Holy Bible part one and part two:

Stasis rules.

The Eastern, Middle, Mountain and West Coast militias control their areas each without challenge,

Most infrastructure in the four militia regions has been destroyed; movement of people, goods and services have, therefore, ceased.

Electricity is gone.

Darkness spans what had previously been called the United States of America.

And the militias rule; taxes are levied; laws are imagined and enforced.

Calm is upon the land.

Like, some say, the calm before - something; no one remembers what that something might be, or ever might have been.

The continent has returned to its roots, albeit primitive, roots.

the donald has won.

Prior to his death (according to his followers by assassination at the hands of Adam Schiff - but more likely by choking on a chicken bone) the donald had called his followers to smite the hands that were denying him his divine right of rule, manifested by a CABAL of non believing wild eyed left wing deep state based FBI and related agency fanatics who, with malice and malice  and malice, indicted the donald for crimes against the Republic.

His followers rose up and took back their country.

They smote.

En Masse.

And now there are four.

And darkness, glorious darkness, rules the land.

Two Images

 When in Paris I take a lot of pictures of roses.

Sweet Gum leaves in the Autumn are another favorite subject; here is an example of that from l'Arsenal de Paris; that's where everybody moors their boats; it's a rather sublime place.

They Are All Pickin' On Ol' Ken Paxton

 The Texas House has voted to impeach the Texas Attorney General.

In a state where there really aren't any Democrats a surprising number of republicans voted to impeach.

I just heard one of the republicans who voted against impeachment decrying the "other party" (that's the party of which there really aren't any in Texas) for trumping up the whole tawdry affair.

Paxton has 20 serious charges levied against him.

The State has just had to pony up 3 million dollars in damage payments for some lawsuit against Paxton that Paxton lost.

But it's all the Democrats after poor little Kenny, according to one of his supporters.

I got curious: who filed the articles of impeachment and what is their party?

So I asked GPT-Enhanced Bing.

Here is what Bing said.

The Ebb And Flow Of Being A Blogger

 I started this blog in 2010 to accommodate my desire to document four months in Paris.

I changed the name of the blog in 2014 to accommodate documenting five months in Paris.

Over time I have posted over 2400 posts.

That is probably why sometimes - for days at a time, sometimes - I get startling numbers of page views.

Each new post gets a few, maybe, on a good day, 20 or 25, but sometimes pushing a thousand posts accumulate across the aggregate total for a day.

That always brings me up short.

Most posts that I post I consider to be brilliant, or I wouldn't post them, and I believe each time that that one is the one that finally is going to make me an influencer.

Or something great.

But that never happens.

No new post ever exceeds 25 page views.

And that number is seldom, seldom, seldom.

But it's not unusual any more for the blog to have three to five thousand page views in a month.

How can that be? I often shout into the void.

I guess this screen capture tells the tale.

There are a lot of twos and threes looking at stuff I don't even remember posting.

That Schlesinger Thing

 I re-post this as needed.

I first did it several years ago.

This time it's to underline how the republicans haven't changed with time.

So, I guess, if you like things to be fucked up, you need to be a republican.

The recent McCarthy trumped up near-credit-rating-ending little Margery Taylor Greene frolic is a prime example.

Here is what I said and quoted a while back.

**************************************************************

Paris, December 2016:

“I am finally finishing The Age of Jackson written in 1945 based on lectures the author (Arthur Schlesinger Jr.) delivered in 1941.

"I just read the following:

‘... since this is a capitalistic society, the class most interested in its security and prosperity is the capitalist class, which thus should have the most power.

The theory has survived every test but experience.

It simply has not worked. Since the Federalist party, the American business community appears to have lost its political capacity; it has not been, in the strict sense, a ruling class.

In placid days power naturally gravitates to it as the strongest group in the state; but through American history it has been unable to use that power very long for national purposes.

Moved typically by personal and class, rarely by public, considerations, the business community has invariably brought national affairs to a state of crisis and exasperated the rest of society into dissatisfaction bordering on revolt’”.

Free Market Research?

 I recently stayed at the Sheraton at the Nashville Airport.

I got a nice email from the manager.

Part of it said: "Should you receive a survey invitation from Marriott Bonvoy, I would love your feedback there.  Our goal is to exceed your expectations across the board; the cleanliness of your room, the helpfulness of our team, and your experiences in our restaurants and bars."

So I sent him a reply.

I doubt anyone will read it.

Here it is.

I was there on two nights, 25/26 and 31/1.  Both were in and outs - I was on my way to Manchester for a Memorial Day bacchanal, and I got in after midnight on the first one so I took a taxi and everything was closed - it would have been nice to have had a later shuttle than the one I missed, and also to have had the bar still open - so I just went to bed and departed at ten when my ride to Manchester showed up.  The pillows were like rocks and the bed covers were like the lead blanket the dentist puts on someone during X Rays.  But I am used to down duvets and pillows at home, so I'm probably not qualified to judge your bedding.  And I'm on my way to 81 years old, so maybe I'm overly sensitive to weight.

The 31/1 was interesting.  When I booked in February there should have been a warning that there was going to be an old folks convention (some military re-union); I might have booked elsewhere. After taking my bag to my room I managed to find a seat at the bar and order a double Walker's Red on the rocks.  I really like your one big ice cube format; I've never encountered that and it's perfect.  After about half of the Johnnie, the guy next to me started selling me his book: he was a Vietnam vet.  Since I am also a Vietnam vet I tried to sell him my book.  We thanked each other for our service and departed comrades in arms, neither having bought the other's book.

You really need two restaurants: one more or less like the one you have, but with the addition of a BLT and a French dip, and one with steaks and stuff like that.  A long time ago the SFO Marriott had an embedded Schula's Steak House.  That was a nice touch.

In any event, the one you have is nowhere near designed to take the stress of 900 multi-war-vet 'Mericans and their spouses and hangers on.  At dinner time - 1900, or so, I was sharing the long bar adjacent to and parallel the real bar with a couple I had met - he was Vietnam also (an agent orange survivor - barely - but hasn't written a book yet) and we three were able to get our second or third choice. The restaurant had run out of a lot of stuff.  I had an exceptionally average Caesar's salad. On two occasions, once in Atlanta and once in Chicago - ice storm Atlanta, blizzard Chicago - I have seen restaurants run out of a lot of stuff.  I don't see that a known-in-advance stress on the system is justification for running out of what, after all, by design, is already a rather meager menu.  It certainly isn't the same as an Atlanta ice storm.

Your people, the bar/restaurant bunch were exceptional.  What could have been stressingly unpleasant was converted to mildly amusing.  Being out of tater tots?  The whole crew functioned as a team and, obviously, had each other's backs.  Great people. 

You have a nice property from a physical and cosmetic point of view.

Maybe some planning, and some upscaling, might be in order.