Well, I wrote a novel last year and now I'm fighting a prequel/sequel manuscript. So I asked GPT to help me with the plot. I explained the whole plot to him first and then what I have now... He gave me a lot of "common places", clichés, uninteresting plots. A week ago I asked him how to finish a melody I was writing ---yes, I'm master of none--- but that time it was just nonsense answers. Weird because then I asked him about a math problem. He explained it very well, and when I asked for a formula...I got the right one.
I guess that's an interesting consequence of such model languages working by completing with the most probable words. lugares comunes are... common and supposedly what is seen most in the training data.
I've also seen it produce complete gibberish when faced with a math problem. With a very clear but wrong explanation of why is gibberish was the correct answer.
IDK what's going on in US and I barely speak English, so often people here can't understand me. Sorry about that that sentence, it implies I am the chief and you white people have to make and effort to vaguely making out an idea of what I'm saying. Despite my bad English.
<<Circle the wagons>>, that's the King's Indian Defense opening. I often using it when I'm black and my opponent are failing to install his London System. Sorry about that wording. It implies I am the King, or at least, someone is the King and someone is the Indian, the indigenous people who obey and defend the Empire. Well it's just a bishop, you know, that I left in a diagonal. Bishop, obispo, implies I am not an Anglican I guess, I don't mean it. And really really I am not black enough, but you know the rules: one time you are white, then you are black.
<<Indian summer>>. That's interesting. Did not Kant said time is a synthetic a priori knowledge? I'm disagree Mr. Time is a thing we teach each other. My parents struggle hard with my perceiving of time when I was a child, I guess. I wonder how time is like to people like Messi. In my corner of the world we often refers to <<paraguayan hour>> meaning it's expecting you late.
<<User>>. You all know how 'boring' they are. And no, they are no clients, clients are often smart and, I'm thinking of Betterbird, crisps.
<<Too many chiefs, not enough indians>> thanks for the phrase. I like that. Even is a kind of metaphor that for and instant suggests white people, or some people, are indians or indigenous and other are chiefs, you know leaders of people who are born in a certain place.
You are right. Evolution was a very poor choice of wording for variation. People then thinks evolution it has to be something good, when... it's just variation.
Same different: imaginary numbers. Not less number than others. There are plenty good ideas with a poor name: zero-knowledge encryption, and so on.
But born without tusks may be deemed "good" for the survivability of the elephants in the said environment. No tusks = no ivory, therefore minimising the incentive for poachers to hunt them.
My understanding of evolution is the ability to adapt and adjust to the ever-changing environment over multiple generations, and if we treat ivory poaching as an environmental danger, it makes sense for tuskless elephants to pass their genes on.
Yes. It's good to evade a predator. And the process you describe is accurate. But it occurs because the first elephant without tusks happens to live a longer life and prosper and left a large number of descendants just in time when they were hunting by their tusks. It just occurs, it's not a response in the sense of the specie but in the sense of the randomizing events we call world. That's why I said OP is, in the core of his argument, right.
Response would be a better wording. Yes, you are right. <<Evolution>> maybe lead you to assume that variation/response seems to move towards something. But, yeah. You are right.
