Have you heard of ChatGPT yet? It’s a thrilling, vexing, ontologically mesmerizing new technology created by the research group OpenAI. It can solve all your problems and answer all your questions. Or at least it will try to.
In essence, ChatGPT is a bot trained to generate human-like responses to user inputs. Through the wonders of machine learning, it’s acquired a remarkably expansive skillset. On request, it can produce basic software code, rudimentary financial analysis, amusing poems and songs, spot-on imitations, reflective essays on virtually any topic, natural-language summaries of technical papers or scientific concepts, chat-based customer service, informed predictions, personalized advice, and answers — for better or worse — to just about any question. Unusually for a chatbot, it can learn as it goes, and thus sustain engaging open-ended conversations.
It is, to borrow Arthur C. Clarke’s old formulation, “indistinguishable from magic.”
Photo: Pixabay 照片：Pixabay
Almost, anyway. One problem, which its creators concede, is that ChatGPT sometimes offers answers that are precise, authoritative and utterly wrong. A request for an obituary of Mussolini that prominently mentions skateboarding yields a disquisition on the dictator’s interest in the sport that happens to be entirely fictitious. Another soliciting advice for the Federal Reserve returns an essay that cites ostensibly legitimate sources, but that doctors the data to suit the bot’s purposes. Stack Overflow, a forum for coders, has temporarily banned responses from ChatGPT because its answers “have a high rate of being incorrect.” Students looking for a homework assistant should proceed with care.
The bot also seems easily confused. Try posing a classic riddle: “In total, a bat and a ball cost $1.10. If the bat costs $1.00 more than the ball, how much does the ball cost?” Haplessly for a robot, ChatGPT responds with the instinctive but wrong answer of $0.10. (The correct solution is $0.05.) The Internet’s hive mind has been joyfully cataloging other examples of the bot’s faults and frailties.
Such criticism feels misplaced. The fact is, ChatGPT is a remarkable achievement. Not long ago, a conversational bot of such sophistication seemed hopelessly out of reach. As the technology improves — and, crucially, grows more accurate — it seems likely to be a boon for coders, researchers, academics, policymakers, journalists and more, presuming that it doesn’t put them all out of work. Its effect on the knowledge economy could be profound. In previous eras, wars might’ve been fought for access to such a seemingly enchanted tool — and with good reason.
Photo: AFP 照片：法新社
Intriguingly, OpenAI plans to make the tool available as an application programming interface (or API), which will allow outside developers to integrate it into their Web sites or apps without needing to understand the underlying technology. That means companies could soon use ChatGPT to create virtual assistants, customer service bots or marketing tools. They could automate document review and other tedious tasks. Down the road, they might use it to generate new ideas and simplify decision-making. In all likelihood, no one has thought of the best uses for it yet.
In that respect and others, ChatGPT exemplifies a widening array of artificial-intelligence tools that may soon transform entire industries, from manufacturing to health care to finance. Investment has been surging in the field. Breakthroughs seem to proliferate by the day. Many industry experts express unbounded enthusiasm. By one analysis, AI will likely contribute a staggering $15.7 trillion to the global economy by 2030.
As yet, policymakers seem largely unaware of this revolution, let alone prepared for it. They should greet it in a spirit of optimism, while being attentive to its potential risks — to data security, privacy, employment and more. They might also ponder some rather more existential concerns. For better and worse, ChatGPT heralds a very different world in the making.(Bloomberg)
Photo: AFP 照片：法新社
你聽過ChatGPT嗎？這是OpenAI研究小組創建的令人興奮、令人煩惱、在本體論上令人著迷的新技術。它可以解決你所有的問題、回答你所有疑問。或者說，它至少會試試看。
本質上而言，ChatGPT是一種機器人，經訓練後，對用戶的輸入可產生像人類般的回應。透過機器學習的奇妙機制，它習得非常廣泛的技能。它可以應要求生成簡單的軟體程式、基本的財務分析、有趣的詩和歌曲、準確的模仿、幾乎任何主題的反思性文章、用自然語言對技術論文或科學概念做出摘要、以聊天進行的客戶服務、有見識的預測、個人化的建議，以及回答幾乎所有的問題（無論好壞）。跟一般的聊天機器人所不同的是，它可以邊做邊學，因而維持引人入勝的開放式對話。。
借用科幻小說家亞瑟．C．克拉克所說的話來說，它「跟魔法沒什麼兩樣」。
總之差不多是這樣。其創建者承認的一個問題是，ChatGPT有時會提供準確、權威且完全錯誤的答案。要求在一篇墨索里尼的訃告中顯著提到滑板運動，結果是關於這位獨裁者對此運動之興趣的討論剛好是完全是虛構的。另一篇為美國聯準會徵求建議的文章，其中引用的出處表面上合法，但其數據已按機器人的目的被篡改。程式設計師論壇Stack Overflow暫時禁止來自ChatGPT的回覆，因為它的答案「錯誤率很高」。想要以它來協助家庭作業的學生應該小心。
該機器人看來也很容易被搞糊塗。用一個經典的謎題試試：「一支球棒和一個球總共花費1.10美元。若球棒比球貴1.00美元，那麼球要多少錢」？對於機器人來說不幸的是，ChatGPT以0.10美元這直觀但錯誤的答案做出回應。（正確答案為 0.05美元。）網路的蜂群思維一直在愉快地記錄機器人錯誤及弱點的其他例子。
這樣的批評感覺是錯誤的。事實上，ChatGPT是一項了不起的成就。不久前，如此複雜的對話機器人似乎遙不可及。隨著技術的改進——且至關重要的是，它變得更加準確——它似乎有可能成為程式設計師、研究人員、學者、政策制定者、記者等的福音。（假設ChatGPT不會讓他們全都失業。）它對知識經濟的影響可能是深遠的。在過去的時代，戰爭可能是為了獲得這種看似迷人的工具而進行的——而且有充分的理由。
有趣的是，OpenAI計劃將該工具作為應用程式介面（API）提供，這將允許外部開發人員將其結合到他們的網站或應用程式中，而無需了解底層技術。這意味公司可以很快使用ChatGPT創建虛擬助理、客戶服務機器人或營銷工具。他們可以自動執行文檔審查和其他繁瑣的任務。未來，他們可能會用它來產生新概念並簡化決策。很可能還沒有人想到它的最佳用途。
在此方面及其他層面，ChatGPT代表了範圍廣泛的人工智慧工具，這些工具可能很快就會改變整個行業，從製造業到醫療保健再到金融業。該領域的投資一直在激增，似乎每天都有更多的突破，許多行業專家表達了無限的熱情。根據一項分析，到二○三○年，人工智慧可能會為全球經濟貢獻驚人的15.7兆美元。
到目前為止，政策制定者似乎基本上沒有意識到這場革命，更不用說為它做好準備了。他們應該以樂觀的精神迎接它，同時注意它的潛在風險——資料安全、隱私、就業等。他們也可能會思考一些更關乎生存的問題。無論好壞，ChatGPT都預示著一個截然不同的世界正在形成。
（台北時報林俐凱編譯）
Undersea cables are conductors wrapped in insulating materials and laid on the seabed. Their main functions are telecommunications or power transmission. The core of the undersea cables used for Internet signals is optical fiber, using light to transmit Internet signals. Taiwan’s communications are currently handled by 10 domestic undersea cables and 14 international undersea cables. About 99 percent of Taiwan’s Internet bandwidth relies on undersea cables, making them Taiwan’s “digital lifeline.” The demands on the cables’ bandwidth are only set to increase with the development of artificial intelligence (AI), which relies on the data fed into it. Today, data is
Street lights are often taken for granted until a power outage plunges the world into darkness. When that happens, the value of these lighting installations becomes evident as the world turns into a more dangerous place for pedestrians and motorists alike. The Chinese could claim to be the first to have constructed a crude type of street light. Around 500 BC, residents of Beijing employed a type of street lamp that used hollow bamboo pipes and natural gas vents to create burning torches. Later, ancient Romans adopted lamps fueled by vegetable oil, which relied on slaves to light and
Recent events in Taiwan have highlighted the contentious nature of “priority seating” on public transportation. Incidents, such as passengers experiencing emotional distress after being compelled to give up their seats and elderly individuals attacking others after being refused a seat, have prompted a national reassessment of this policy. Some voices in Taiwan now advocate for abolishing priority seats to prevent such conflicts. This issue is not unique to Taiwan. In South Korea, where respect for the elderly is deeply ingrained, priority seating has led to similar confrontations. Younger passengers often face accusations of disrespect if they do not yield seats. In
Spoiler alert and shift blame 破梗&甩鍋 在新冠疫情期間，無論是因為封城 (lockdown) 還是居家隔離 (self-isolation at home)，人們關在家中使用網路的時間大增。這也讓一些原本只存在於網路論壇的用語廣為普及。我們來談一下破梗 (spoiler alert) 與甩鍋 (shift blame) 這兩個用語。 有位古典文學教授 Joel Christensen 針對領導統御與疫情控制寫了一篇以古喻今、相當深入的文章：“Plagues follow bad leadership in ancient Greek tales”，文中出現一些講法，可用來翻譯上述的流行語： In the 5th century B.C., the playwright Sophocles begins Oedipus Tyrannos with the title character struggling to identify the cause of a plague striking his city, Thebes. (Spoiler alert: It’s his own bad leadership.) (Joel Christensen, “Plagues follow bad leadership in ancient Greek tales,” The Conversation, March 12, 2020) 作者提到 Oedipus（伊底帕斯）想找出瘟疫何以降臨他的城邦的緣由，加了一句：Spoiler alert: It’s his own bad leadership.（破梗：領導無方）。Spoiler alert 就是「破梗」，如果用在有人洩漏電影劇情的情境中，也可以翻作「小心爆雷」或「劇透警告」。疫情之下，在家看影集、電影成了很多人的娛樂，但要小心劇透 (spoilers)，很多 YouTube 上的影評在開頭也都會說 Spoiler alert!，警告還沒看過電影的觀眾小心爆雷、劇透。 至於「甩鍋」，源自大陸網民用語，通常意指某人犯了錯之後想推卸責任、轉移焦點、甚至讓別人背黑鍋的做法。疫情爆發後，相關網路資訊量爆增，許多中國網民也想找人為這場疫情負責，紛紛呼籲地方政府首長、地方黨書記不要「甩鍋」。 其實，在古代文學《奧德賽》中，就有「將自己的責任怪罪眾神」的說法，試用時下流行的「甩鍋」來重新翻譯： Humans are always blaming the gods for their suffering, but they experience
RSS