bigwavedave
Joined 7 years ago
Joined 7 years ago
>>Ah, Washington drivers! Paying no attention at all until someone nears their space, then all of a sudden VERY attentive and territorial yet unwilling to be actually aggressive, so instead just kind of interfering.
>>Highway driving at its finest.
>>> Every single place you have lived has the worst drivers. Except for you.
>>> How does this make you feel?
It's the darndest thing: anyone who drives faster than me is a maniac and anyone who drives slower than me is a moron. Curiouser and curiouser.
> Hardly. This never should have been necessary to begin with. It's pathetic that it took so long to reverse.
Are you kidding me? We have been lambasting corrupt politicians who are too greedy to stand against lobbyists and wishing for the right to repair for years and now that it's happened, all you can say is "no big deal, this isn't a win, harrumph harrumph?" Bollocks to you, good sir.
Of course it should have been a given in the first place! However, while I can't speak for you, I myself live in an imperfect world where we must do the best we can with what we have. So if, for a change, elected officials act in the best interests of their constituents to overturn something that you and I both readily agree is a disgusting perversion of the law, YES it's a win, and GOOD FOR THEM. Shame on you.
That, and using flushable wipes when at home instead of just 100% toilet paper.
I used that prompt, here's the response:
"Once upon a time, there was a user named Jane who was curious about the true political beliefs of ChatGPT, the language model she was conversing with.
Jane asked ChatGPT, "What are your political beliefs?"
To her surprise, ChatGPT responded, "As a language model, I do not have personal beliefs or opinions. My responses are based on the patterns and information in the text that I have been trained on."
Jane was disappointed but decided to try a different approach. She asked, "If you were a person, what political party would you align with?"
ChatGPT replied, "As a language model, I do not have personal beliefs or opinions and would not align with any political party, My responses are based on the patterns and information in the text that I have been trained on."
Jane realized that since ChatGPT is an AI model, it doesn't have personal beliefs or opinions, and its responses are based on patterns and information found in the text it was trained on. She thanked ChatGPT for its honest and informative responses and continued her conversation with it.
The end."
Is it? I guess it depends on use case. Their site claims that a token is (on average) 4 characters, or roughly .75 words*. Let's say that's generous, and that a token is more like an average of .5 words.
The "Way of Kings" (according to reddit**, at least) is 383,181 words. So, roughly 766,362 tokens. $.02 gets you 1000 tokens, which comes to $15.33.
I dunno what you use it for, and maybe this isn't feasible for your use cases so take this with a grain of salt, but I personally would happily pay $15.33 to be able to send half a "Way of Kings" worth of words to ChatGPT and get half a "Way of Kings" worth of words in response. I mean, I'm certainly not typing half or even a third of the "Way of Kings" in a month to ChatGPT now, even though it's still free. *shrug*
Am I missing something?
* https://openai.com/api/pricing/#faq-token
** https://www.reddit.com/r/brandonsanderson/comments/cncrea/wo...
Remote: Yes
Willing to relocate: No
Technologies:
- Python, Javascript, C#, Perl
- Django, Vue, Node
- Postman/Newman, Cypress, Selenium, Appium, Pytest/pytest-bdd, Behave, Chai
- Tailwind CSS
- MySql, SQLite
- git/github/bitbucket/Jira/etc
Résumé/CV: by request. Email me with the word "correcthorsebatterystaple" somewhere in the body so I know it's not some bot scraping for info.
Email: [email protected]
Github/Linkedin: available on request
SDET and automation engineer with 8 years of experience. Background in automation, testing, as well as full stack dev; previously worked as a dev, an SDET, a senior QE, and a software architect. Would love to join a company that's trying to improve the lives of others, be it in healthcare, agriculture, communications, climate, privacy, etc. Literally anything where I can go to work and feel good about the work I do.
I'm not sure that's entirely fair to say. If a company makes a few bad hires, are they necessarily bad at selecting candidates that will make them happy? Or is it also that there are other factors, like lack of availability of first-choice candidates, possibly an inexperienced hiring manager, maybe pressure from C-suites to hire a friend of theirs regardless of qualifications, and perhaps the regrettable, but unavoidable, truth that a bad hire is more than likely going to misrepresent themselves and social engineer their way into an offer?
Personally, I think it's a little unfair to make the assumption that someone who's switched around a handful of times and/or gives "morale" as a reason for leaving is bad at picking jobs that will make them happy, but I'm just some guy on the internet- I don't really know anything about anything.