I can see using ChatGPT in the same way as writing prompts - a proverbial kickstarter for an idea. Give me something to kick the tires around, chew on, etc
I think my allergic reaction is the way some folks, at least from public statements, are using ChatGPT recipes as written without processing through our own experiences. (See the number of stunt “AI” brews that have been released commercially)
/r/homebrewing has a current topic on creating/finding recipes: Creating recipes vs finding recipes : Homebrewing
For the record, I did not post anything about ChatGPT there. Haha. I am usually a hybrid approach to recipe creation. I will brew a recipe from another source, usually from Jamil’s BCS, then make changes based on how I want the beer to change. As I said in an earlier post, I only recently found the BrewDog database, and I would like to brew one or two of those to see how they come out.
I thought the /r/homebrewing topic would be interesting as it covered a lot of ideas for how people approach recipe design.
My first experience with the BrewDog recipes (a number of years ago) left me unimpressed. At that time, the recipes I looked at left me with too many “blanks to fill in”. The recipes at the current web site are much better. But it’s a crowded market for recipes - and the recipe books I have don’t require me to “fill in the blanks”.
What’s missing from the “I used ChatGPT to create a recipe” topics I have seen is a discussion on the prompts that were used. From what I’ve seen and experienced, ‘quality’ prompts can do a good job of focusing the statistically generated response (but the response is still subject to ‘making stuff up’).
Maybe I’m the only one who finds recipe formulation to be one of the most enjoyable parts of brewing. Some of my recipes have won at the NHC, which I was super stoked about. I never leave well enough alone and I start tinkering with them again. It’s certainly a learning opportunity for me, especially when I make a mistake.
I think letting AI write your recipes is a little like buying a sports car only to let the auto-pilot drive it for you. It takes all the fun out of it.
I agree with you. I brew for the process, not the beer. I have no desire to eliminate any part of that process.
I can see ChatGPT / AI as a jumping off point for recipe development. No harm in that. I would run it through my own personal filter, just like any other recipe I see on-line.
I just found a feature in AI Chat that surprised me - I was using the Chat on Bing. When I use it, I normally get a response that has specific references for the statements. I felt that the AI Chat basically did detailed searches much faster than a human could. Today I did a chat about UV rays and eye damage. I got a helpful answer, but it didn’t have any references. So I asked “What is the reference for this information?”. The AI Chat answered:
"Certainly! The information I provided is based on widely accepted knowledge about UV radiation and eye health. Here are some reputable sources you can refer to for further reading:
First, I noticed that it does more than just a detailed search. Somehow, it uses “widely accepted knowledge” without any specific references. How does it know all this without specific references?
Second, the further reading it suggested was completely off-base.
Widely accepted knowledge ≈ the programmer’s narrative. [emoji23]
History doesn’t lie. People simply lie about history.
It’s important to remember that ChatGPT is a full-blown moron.
I tried it when it came out. I beat it in arguments because it lied, backtracked, and contradicted itself. It made up responses like a toddler who thinks dad will believe anything.
It can’t write a simple Pascal program that works. Give it a try and see. I gave it a whole bunch of chances, and it was never able to do it.
I can’t see trusting recipe construction to a machine that can’t taste or smell. To me, it’s useful mainly for simple stuff, like asking what’s best for cleaning mineral stains off toilets.
It sounds like Denny and I are in agreement about one thing: the whole process is fun, and for me, the creativity of writing recipes is essential. If I had to use recipes other people, or my toaster, wrote, I’d probably quit.
+1. And can I join the group?
Morons are capable of thought. LLMs, not so much.
LLMs (like ChatGPT) can be good at summarizing information, but I wouldn’t consider LLMs to be creative.
For some background on LLMs (and ChatGPT), consider giving this a read:
– https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2023/02/what-is-chatgpt-doing-and-why-does-it-work/
Like any other category of “software”, it has a use.
Is it artificial? Yes
Is it intelligent? No; it’s statistical word generation.
When I use it for work, I can save some time by using it to summarize a topic within a body of knowledge. Generally, the time savings comes from the creation of the summary. I seem to spend the same amount of time verifying the information.
Code generation is currently “hit or miss” - much like “stack overflow” topics.
Overall, it feels like ChatGPT is “bing on steroids” with a different “gate keeper” who obscures original sources.
Back to brewing beer at home: here’s a starter “prompt” for comparing 30 min and 90 min boils …
I think one problem with ChatGPT is that people assume it’s perfect instead of finding out what it’s good at and using it for whatever that is. I’m a lawyer, and the legal establishment is now telling us horror stories about incompetent lawyers who let ChatGPT write memoranda of law. It makes cases up. So not really a lawyer, but useful when you want to know how to refinish a door.
It kind of reminds me of people’s attitudes about Einstein. He was a tremendous idiot about a lot of things, but people think that because he was a great physicist, everything he said about anything was great advice.
Agreed.
I find that, with the right prompts, it can be useful for summarizing a topic.
I’ll suggest being extremely cautious when trying to use it to learn something new - quality educational material is quality material because it’s reviewed and edited.
As for creating content, I could see using it outline a topic, then write a first draft of various sections. Reviews and editing are still necessary to produce quality content.
eta: one area of LLM research involves training LLMs on LLM generated content.