Im sure she willThank You ! Now let's hope she can do something fruitful with this in the future.
Perhaps I'm misinformed but what I read was the bar exam it passed had written essays in it, not just multiple choice at which it's known to excel, and it had to apply reasoning and logic. Higher thinking. The stuff that should scare us.The hard work of becoming a lawyer, getting into law school, getting a law degree, and articling, is done before the bar exam. The bar exam is a certification exam, it is multiple choice, it is mostly about ethics, rules, procedures, etc., not analyzing and presenting cases. Would you like to be defended by an AI lawyer in court against a criminal charge such as manslaughter or murder?
Perhaps I'm misinformed but what I read was the bar exam it passed had written essays in it, not just multiple choice at which it's known to excel, and it had to apply reasoning and logic. Higher thinking. The stuff that should scare us.
And no I would not want to be defended by an AI - today. But ask me again in 3 months.
This is an entertaining thread! I think most people here are severely underestimating what AI can already do, and what it's going to do. Call it a glorified chatbot all you want, but it is growing up fast.
Ha ha ha!Hello!
I asked chat GPT to create a low noise condenser microphone schematics
That's what I got:
To design a low noise studio microphone circuit with a condenser capsule that is phantom powered, you can use the following schematic:
yaml
+48V DC Phantom Power
|
|
R1
|
|
+--------+--------+
| |
C1 R2
| |
| |
+------+-------+ +------+-------+
| | | |
R3 C2 R4 R5
| | | |
Audio Signal Output <-----+------+-------+ +-------+------+< Audio Signal Ground
| |
C3 R6
| |
| |
GND GND
Where:
The microphone capsule is biased by the +48V DC phantom power through R1, which charges the backplate of the capsule. The front plate of the capsule is connected to ground through R2. The AC voltage across the capsule is amplified by the JFET amplifier consisting of R4, R5, and C2.
- C1 is the condenser capsule microphone
- R1 is a 10 kOhm resistor that biases the capsule
- R2 is a 100 kOhm resistor that connects the capsule to ground
- C2 is a 4.7 nF capacitor that blocks DC voltage from passing through
- R3 is a 2.2 kOhm resistor that sets the impedance of the capsule
- R4 is a 2.7 kOhm resistor that sets the gain of the amplifier
- R5 is a 1 kOhm resistor that limits the output current of the amplifier
- C3 is a 47 uF capacitor that blocks any DC voltage on the output
- R6 is a 100 Ohm resistor that provides a DC path to ground for the amplifier
To reduce the noise of the circuit, the values of the components have been chosen carefully. The values of R3, R4, and R5 are chosen to provide a high gain, while keeping the noise levels low. C1 and C2 are chosen to provide a flat frequency response, while blocking any DC voltage. C3 is chosen to provide a low-frequency roll-off to reduce any rumble or handling noise.
R6 provides a DC path to ground for the amplifier, and the output impedance of the amplifier is set by R5, which is relatively low, so it can drive long cables without significant signal loss.
Overall, this circuit provides a high-quality, low-noise phantom-powered condenser microphone with a low output impedance and a flat frequency response, suitable for studio recording applications.
To connect the schematic to an audio interface with phantom power via XLR, follow these steps:
Note: Some audio interfaces may have a switch to turn on or off the phantom power. Make sure the switch is turned on before connecting the circuit.
- Locate the XLR input on the audio interface that provides phantom power.
- Connect Pin 1 of the XLR connector to the ground symbol (GND) in the schematic.
- Connect Pin 2 of the XLR connector to the output of the circuit, which is located on the right side of the schematic.
- Connect Pin 3 of the XLR connector to the +48V DC Phantom Power symbol in the schematic.
Here's a summary of the connections:
Pin 1 (GND) of XLR connector -> GND in schematic Pin 2 (Hot) of XLR connector -> Output of circuit in schematic Pin 3 (+48V) of XLR connector -> +48V DC Phantom Power in schematic
Once connected, the circuit should be powered by the phantom power from the audio interface and ready to use.
What do you think about it?
Respectfully, no, it is not.If looked hard enough, the essay was likely 90% plagiarized from elsewhere, no reasoning, logic is something machines excel.
An AI would find Solomon's judgement in 1 Kings 3 perfect and order it carried out regardless. It would follow the logic of Solomon, but not the reasoning.
There is NO AI in existence in the classical definition whatsoever.
What we have is a engine to collect data and a human input that provides filtering. That is not AI. It is machine learning. It is the next step after google. It is a nice wrapper on google.
Thor
Have you even tried ChatGPT?
Regardless of whatever is going on under the hood, it is able to render useful and often impressive responses.
Ask it to develop an outline for you for a talk about Impedance. You'll have a 10-point outline ready to go. Take each subtopic and ask it to expand it. You'll have your whole speech, and just need to customize it.
Honestly, the people denigrating the tech are very much like the musicians on the Titanic.
Carry on; nothing to worry about here.
Thanks for sharing. I'm surprised it didn't surprise you. I really depends on the prompts you give it I suppose.Yes.
I did not find that the case.
But I don't want a talk about impedance.
I asked for relatively simple things, for example code for a specific MCU to use the USB connection as UART for debug.
After a few tries I gave up, busted out my Google Foo with a few added keywords from ChatGPT and promptly found an example for a near identical MCU.
And that worked fine.
It also got the amount of chlorine for my pool wrong, despite getting a fairly location and size. A different on line calculator was much closer to my actual use with test kit.
I do not denigrate Tech. At least not until after trying.
In my view the tasks I gave it were simple and ideally suited to machine learning and basic AI style systems. It failed grossly.
By comparison the olde MK1 Actual Intelligence (AI) did fine with a keyboard and google to obtain solutions that were in the ballpark.
Thor
Thanks for sharing. I'm surprised it didn't surprise you. I really depends on the prompts you give it I suppose.
In any case, this will be interesting going forward.
We will need to agree to disagree.Maybe I'm more intelligent than ChatGPT?
Before being blackballed by east germanys communists from the University subject I wanted to do (Cybernetics) and barely getting into a polytechnic EE course because of family connections, I was on the path into what we now call AI and I remained interested.
So perhaps my expectations are different as I know what to expect and a mechanical turk doesn't impress me?
This we agree. I think in principle something like ChatGPT is a way to make a good human machine interface for knowledge/machine learning systems.
But I do not see it becoming self aware and ever anything more than a nice wrapper around google and doing basic filtering and amalgamation of search results.
If it ever gets really good at that it would be amazing. Even more if it could gain this ability through self-learning and not through algorithm change by the creators.
Thor
We will need to agree to disagree.
It has a lot of creativity. It writes workable computer code solving problems. It writes essays and has logic capabilities.
May I recommend this Video?
Peter is right on the money.
ChatGPT will be able to kill all lower White Collar Job's, as these do not add real value, but simply collate and repeat. It will put all the lesser spotted repeaters out of their job's.
A lot of the Office Plankton that normally just fills the offices and vegetates there for life (I have known a lot of the "lifers") and output a lot of the same that they get as input (e.g. partially liquid macerated natural fertiliser).
What ChatGPT will never do however, make connections between things that are not directly and visibly connected. It cannot deduct new facts from what is presented to it. So it will never replace the thinkers and doers. Because simply put, it cannot think and do. Because, it is Artificial for sure, but NOT really "Intelligence".
Or more philosophically, it can perfectly impersonate Kant's Daemon Thesis and his Angel Antithesis, but it cannot reconnot reconcile Thesis and Antithesis by arriving atSynthesis.
Thor
AI, the pattern recognition kind we have now, can be used to detect and determine the obvious often with more acuity than humans but humans are still superior at exceptions to the obvious and well-known.Actually medical AI's are being used to tease out details and make connections that the humans can't, detecting medical issues that medical doctors miss. In fact in many cases the medical AI's have better accuracy than doctors, so to say that the AI's cannot make connections between disparate data sets is not accurate. They can, and they do.
I understand what you're saying, that the "copy/paste" jobs will go away, but I just don't think you really understand what is happ[ening here. This is infinitely more than an over glorified web browser.
Whatever is going on under the hood is some kind of intelligence - call it what you want. Can it "think" like we do? Of course not. But is it capable of outputting increasingly better and better results? Absolutely.
And these things improve month by month, and the average worker does not.
Months ago it was passing the bar at 10%, now 90%. It doesn't take a genius to see where this is heading.
It's comforting to think that we humans cannot be bettered, but we have been, by our own devices. Calculators, chess players, Go players, now journalists, programmers, artists, soon musicians, and the list grows.
This is the beginning of the beginning of the beginning. Scoff if you want, but this there is nothing that will stop this.
And we will see AGI in our lifetimes, or something very close to it.
Again, say what you want about whether it is "sentient" or it "thinks" or it has "actual intelligence." These are philosophical arguments only.
That matters little when mass job layoffs occur, jobs will NOT be replaced. Yes, traditionally revolutionary disruptions create more jobs, and this will too. However, the rank and file of human beings that you call office vegetation also need a way to make money. We can't all be entrepreneurs. There will be mass layoffs coming - and already organizations like CNN have laid off a ton of journalists. This is as real as it gets.
We are in for a very, very rough ride. Dangerous, scary, exciting, and there's nothing on earth that will stop this from moving forward.
The singularity is a real thing, and it will happen.
I appreciate your skepticism and I would give anything for you to be right, because these things scare me.
I found it exceedingly dumb. I asked it a series of questions about audio transformers during which it recommended a book on audio transformers by Bill Whitlock. it even gave the ISBN number. I looked it up but the ISBN it had given me was for a completely different book - not even about transformers. So I told it this. it apologised and gave me a different ISBN. Long story short I did this about 10 times and each time it gave yet another wrong ISBN number. II tried once more and also asked it if it was absolutely sure this was the correct ISBN number and and it confirmed that it was but it still gave the ISBN of an unrelated book.Thanks for sharing. I'm surprised it didn't surprise you. I really depends on the prompts you give it I suppose.
In any case, this will be interesting going forward.
Thanks,
Mike
I somewhat agree. But I wouldn't say it's exceedingly dumb. It really depends on what your asking. The response is usually put together very cleverly to 'not' give a definitive answer.I found it exceedingly dumb. I asked it a series of questions about audio transformers during which it recommended a book on audio transformers by Bill Whitlock. it even gave the ISBN number. I looked it up but the ISBN it had given me was for a completely different book - not even about transformers. So I told it this. it apologised and gave me a different ISBN. Long story short I did this about 10 times and each time it gave yet another wrong ISBN number. II tried once more and also asked it if it was absolutely sure this was the correct ISBN number and and it confirmed that it was but it still gave the ISBN of an unrelated book.
Not in the least impressive.
Cheers
Ian
Enter your email address to join: