#ChatGPT cheat sheet

[omgitzlo]

Unlock the full power of #ChatGPT with this free prompting cheat sheet. Smarter prompts = better results. Let AI work for you. 💡🚀

[sillygoofyqueer]

Deity Jester AU to come later today, for now take this random brainworm I had this morning: MDZS modern AU where Wei Wuxian and Lan Wangji get paired up for a school project to their equal dismay. Wei Wuxian tries to use ChatGPT because "oh em gee it's so much easier than having to sit around writing!" but every time he does this, Lan Wangji reads it and goes "no AI." because he's like a human AI detector and can tell that this lifeless slop is not written by a human. It gets to the point where it's taking up more time to try and get AI past Lan Wangji than just writing out his part, so Wei Wuxian finally, begrudgingly caves and writes up his part of the essay. Lan Wangji reads it and is like "this is the most beautiful writing I've ever seen" because it's just wild and fantastical and so obviously a sign of just humanity. Human intellect and thought processes. It may go off the rails at some points (Lan Wangji has the version history pulled up just to be sure that there hasn't been anything added in, and there are many instances of a completely insane paragraph being written only to be entirely deleted because the moral debate of nature versus nurture doesn't actually have anything to do with the historical battle of whenever the fuck), but it is brilliant. Cut to Lan Wangji trying to Pavlov Wei Wuxian into not using AI.

[raven-at-the-writing-desk]

Hi! I'm trying to get into writing twst fanfiction, but I'm having some trouble with keeping the boys in-character. What do you think are their base traits? Like, what's the foundation of their personalities?

Hello! I spent a long time debating about whether to respond to this ask or not. Ultimately, a lot of the thoughts I would include in my response are the same as what I have already expressed here. However, I've noticed that this has become sort of a recurring issue, so I'd like to address this more seriously.

I've recently been getting a lot of people requesting that I basically tell them how to write the Twst characters. Tens and tens of them, in fact (too many to include all in one post). Sometimes it's an ask like, "please list out strengths/weaknesses or a summary of their character traits", and sometimes it's more specific like, "here is a prompt I am working on; how do you think [character] would act in this situation?" I'm NOT comfortable with either type of ask and refuse to answer asks of this nature.

I want to be clear: this is NOT the same as asking for general writing advice; this is literally just asking to be spoon-fed the answers. There is a difference between seeking advice on how to overcome writer's block or asking what are techniques to show, don't tell (which is general writing advice) versus asking someone to specifically instruct them on how to write Leona Kingscholar from the hit Disney mobile game Twisted Wonderland. The former is okay with me, while the latter is not.

While I am flattered that people care about my opinion and hold it in high regard, I am not here to be a cheat sheet, and nor are my opinions the "most correct". There is no single "correct" way to write a character, and even if there was, it's certainly not mine. Only the Twst devs themselves are the "most correct", as whatever they produce is what ends up as canon.

As I have said in my previous post on this topic, having someone else tell you how to write does little to help you. Writing is a skill, and skills are not inherent. They are something you train in, practice, and learn. Looking at a bunch of adjectives will not help you write or understand the characters any better than you currently do. If anything, it just means you don’t develop or practice your critical analysis skills. In a worse-case scenario, it devalues what a writer does, as it places the burden on them to condense what they know into a laundry list of characterization--as if it doesn't take us tons of time to hone those writing skills. The only real way to get the results you want is to do your own research, develop your own interpretations, and practice, practice, practice. There is no magic pill or shortcut or streamlining or easy way to do it and come out with a quality result. You have to be willing to put in the time and the effort to learn a skill, and that extends to writing, be it for this fandom, another fandom, or even for non-fandom writing. Think about it like this: when you're writing a good research paper, do you go and ask a single other source to gather all your data and summarize it for you? Of course not. You have to go out and manually collect the resources, do the reading, take notes, and gain an understanding of those resources. Then you use your newfound knowledge to summarize and to synthesize your own conclusions in your research paper. The same logic applies for writing in fandom.

I'm not sure why there is this sudden interest in shortcuts. Is it social media shortening our attention spans? Is it the rise of A.I. like ChatGPT making people more reliant on and more comfortable with summaries? Is it that people are concerned with nailing characterization or instant success the first time around? Is it that the internet's so much crueler with comments + feedback that we want to avoid OOC-ness as much as possible? Is it that I just so happen to like talking about character analysis so people think I must know everything? It could be any of these reasons or a combination of them--but whatever the reasoning is, it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It's concerning to me that it seems like people are becoming less and less interested in thinking for themselves and instead are increasingly reliant on others telling them how to create. You NEED to fail and get stuff wrong. You NEED to be able to have the courage to try things on your own. Don't be afraid of failure--failure isn't inherently a bad thing, it is how we learn, grow, and shape our own styles and ways of thinking! I definitely was not perfect when I first started out. I had to fail and stumble and struggle to get my craft to where it is today. So did every single one of your favorite creators. Artists had stick figures, writers had their first words. No artist or writer started off making masterpieces. Arguably, they still don't. Every creator is continuously learning and trying to improve their craft. It's not as though they hit perfection one day and decided to stay stagnant. I feel that it devalues what we make when we try to boil down all the skill we've developed into easy "answer keys" for others to digest. Again, you can ask all you want and seek out as many shortcuts as you like, but that's not going to be properly absorbed into your brain unless you walk the walk for yourself. You can't assume that learning these things will be as easy as reading a summary, memorizing a tutorial, figuring out what brush someone uses, etc.--it wasn't for the people you're asking for this advice from either. Failing is normal and expected. You will also never be able to create something that pleases everyone or something that everyone agrees with--so instead of trying to appeal to an unseen audience, please focus on creating what makes you happy. You have your own creative journeys ahead of you, so don't be scared to walk that road! It can be tough and you'll hit roadblocks and challenges--but overcome them, and you'll become even stronger and more skilled than you were before.

Best of luck!

[satanfemme]

discussions of class barriers and "the purpose of school" aside, if I were a kid in 2025 I would probably be using chatgpt as homework help because -- and this may be a shock to some of you nerds who apparently loveeeed doing homework and found it so helpful to your learning process -- for some kids whether or not their homework gets done directly impacts their physical safety, AND their inability to do it is a matter of disability.

when I was in school I used cheating websites all the time (because wow cheating isn't a new phenomenon) and the difference between the days where I could find an answer sheet online vs the days where I couldn't find an answer sheet wasn't "sometimes I learn something and sometimes I don't". the difference was either "I turn something in and things are 'normal' at home" or "I am unable to turn something in so that night my parents berate me so hard for being a lazy piece of shit that I have a panic attack and throw up, and then I get told the reason I'm reacting that way is because I'm an insane diseased Thing that stole their actual child and one day they'd drug me enough that I'd disappear and bring their real, non-disabled child back". acute bloggers will notice that neither of these outcomes involved "learning something" because for a lot of kids that's simply not what school is primarily about, or could ever be about.

so my Hot AI Take of the day is that if chatgpt helps enough students cheat that even one (1) disabled or abused kid is able to avoid shit like that happening to them and survive until they can move out, then AI is awesome actually and maybe we can consider this material reality of the place school holds in many kids' lives before we start making fun of the current generation for being stupid and lazy and spoiled and "why don't they just try harder and learn something it's not that hard". etc

[mariacallous]

One phrase encapsulates the methodology of nonfiction master Robert Caro: Turn Every Page. The phrase is so associated with Caro that it’s the name of the recent documentary about him and of an exhibit of his archives at the New York Historical Society. To Caro it is imperative to put eyes on every line of every document relating to his subject, no matter how mind-numbing or inconvenient. He has learned that something that seems trivial can unlock a whole new understanding of an event, provide a path to an unknown source, or unravel a mystery of who was responsible for a crisis or an accomplishment. Over his career he has pored over literally millions of pages of documents: reports, transcripts, articles, legal briefs, letters (45 million in the LBJ Presidential Library alone!). Some seemed deadly dull, repetitive, or irrelevant. No matter—he’d plow through, paying full attention. Caro’s relentless page-turning has made his work iconic.

In the age of AI, however, there’s a new motto: There’s no need to turn pages at all! Not even the transcripts of your interviews. Oh, and you don’t have to pay attention at meetings, or even attend them. Nor do you need to read your mail or your colleagues’ memos. Just feed the raw material into a large language model and in an instant you’ll have a summary to scan. With OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Google’s Gemini, and Anthropic’s Claude as our wingmen, summary reading is what now qualifies as preparedness.

LLMs love to summarize, or at least that’s what their creators set them about doing. Google now “auto-summarizes” your documents so you can “quickly parse the information that matters and prioritize where to focus.” AI will even summarize unread conversations in Google Chat! With Microsoft Copilot, if you so much as hover your cursor over an Excel spreadsheet, PDF, Word doc, or PowerPoint presentation, you’ll get it boiled down. That’s right—even the condensed bullet points of a slide deck can be cut down to the … more essential stuff? Meta also now summarizes the comments on popular posts. Zoom summarizes meetings and churns out a cheat sheet in real time. Transcription services like Otter now put summaries front and center, and the transcription itself in another tab.

Why the orgy of summarizing? At a time when we’re only beginning to figure out how to get value from LLMs, summaries are one of the most straightforward and immediately useful features available. Of course, they can contain errors or miss important points. Noted. The more serious risk is that relying too much on summaries will make us dumber.

Summaries, after all, are sketchy maps and not the territory itself. I’m reminded of the Woody Allen joke where he zipped through War and Peace in 20 minutes and concluded, “It’s about Russia.” I’m not saying that AI summaries are that vague. In fact, the reason they’re dangerous is that they’re good enough. They allow you to fake it, to proceed with some understanding of the subject. Just not a deep one.

As an example, let’s take AI-generated summaries of voice recordings, like what Otter does. As a journalist, I know that you lose something when you don’t do your own transcriptions. It’s incredibly time-consuming. But in the process you really know what your subject is saying, and not saying. You almost always find something you missed. A very close reading of a transcript might allow you to recover some of that. Having everything summarized, though, tempts you to look at only the passages of immediate interest—at the expense of unearthing treasures buried in the text.

Successful leaders have known all along the danger of such shortcuts. That’s why Jeff Bezos, when he was CEO of Amazon, banned PowerPoint from his meetings. He famously demanded that his underlings produce a meticulous memo that came to be known as a “6-pager.” Writing the 6-pager forced managers to think hard about what they were proposing, with every word critical to executing, or dooming, their pitch. The first part of a Bezos meeting is conducted in silence as everyone turns all 6 pages of the document. No summarizing allowed!

To be fair, I can entertain a counterargument to my discomfort with summaries. With no effort whatsoever, an LLM does read every page. So if you want to go beyond the summary, and you give it the proper prompts, an LLM can quickly locate the most obscure facts. Maybe one day these models will be sufficiently skilled to actually identify and surface those gems, customized to what you’re looking for. If that happens, though, we’d be even more reliant on them, and our own abilities might atrophy.

Long-term, summary mania might lead to an erosion of writing itself. If you know that no one will be reading the actual text of your emails, your documents, or your reports, why bother to take the time to dig up details that make compelling reading, or craft the prose to show your wit? You may as well outsource your writing to AI, which doesn’t mind at all if you ask it to churn out 100-page reports. No one will complain, because they’ll be using their own AI to condense the report to a bunch of bullet points. If all that happens, the collective work product of a civilization will have the quality of a third-generation Xerox.

As for Robert Caro, he’s years past his deadline on the fifth volume of his epic LBJ saga. If LLMs had been around when he began telling the president’s story almost 50 years ago—and he had actually used them and not turned so many pages—the whole cycle probably would have been long completed. But not nearly as great.

[fuckinghomepage]

MARCH 10, 2024

IT'S FUCKING SUNDAY.

WORDS OF WISDOM OF THE FUCKING DAY:

THE TRUEST GREATNESS LIES IN BEING KIND, THE TRUEST WISDOM IN A HAPPY MIND.

EDUCATE YOUR IGNORANT ASS:

A CHATGPT CHEAT SHEET. more>>

FUCKING MIND-BLOWING BOOK OF THE DAY:

STAY CURIOUS AND KEEP FUCKING EXPLORING. more>>

USEFUL SHIT OF THE GODDAMN DAY:

ENJOY YOUR FUCKING PORCH. more>>

WEBSITE OF THE FUCKING DAY:

NETWORKING FOR MOVIE MOTHERFUCKERS. more>>

AWESOME-AS-SHIT VIDEO OF THE DAY:

THE EARTHQUAKE THAT LASTED TWO FUCKING CENTURIES. more>>

[my-timing-is-digital]

DOSSIER CHEAT SHEET

LEGAL NAME: Data Soong

NICKNAME[S]: He doesn't have one, but would love to have one. So, send in your best Data nicknames for mah boi! (Although I like the one Mirror!Barclay gave him in a personal log, which is "Picard's pet android.")

DATE OF BIRTH ACTIVATION: February 2, 2338

GENDER: Male

PLACE OF BIRTH ACTIVATION: Omicron Theta colony

CURRENTLY LIVING: On the U.S.S. Enterprise

SPOKEN LANGUAGES: English, French, binary, and probably a lot more (Earth languages as well as alien languages). This funky lil' android is literally a walking ChatGPT, albeit more advanced.

EDUCATION: Starfleet Academy.

HAIR COLOR: Depends on the lighting; sometimes it's dark brown / brown, at other times, it's auburn.

EYE COLOR: A greenish yellow (or chartreuse, according to Google).

HEIGHT: 1.80 / 5'9''

WEIGHT: 100 kg

FAMILY INFORMATION

SIBLING[S]: B-4 and Lore, his older brothers (and Altan Inigo Soong, I suppose, although I'd like to think of him as Data's half-brother, since Juliana never mentioned him, so he might have had a different mother? God knows what Noonian has been up to in that weird jungle hideout of him).

PARENT[S]: Doctor Noonian Soong and Juliana Soong

RELATIVE[S]: Adam Soong, Arik Soong, and Ira Graves, but idk if he even qualifies lol.

CHILDREN: Lal, Dahj and Soji (and technically an entire planet of androids, but let's not over-complicate things).

PET[S]: SPOT! His precious cat!

RELATIONSHIP INFORMATION

SEXUAL ORIENTATION: Tbh, I've thought about this a lot, but never wrote it down as a proper headcanon; I'd like Data to represent the minority and state that he's aromantic — he's possibly bordering on the asexuality spectrum as well. And as for his preference, he doesn't have one; not only does his programming prohibit him from discriminating between genders and withhold him from engaging in favouritism, he's also genuinely fascinated by everyone. In other words, he doesn't nurture a strong preference for a specific gender. However, since he's aromantic he's not really interested in pursuing a romantic relationship with anyone; it's primarily friendships he's after, familial or platonic.

RELATIONSHIP STATUS: Data is a single bean, just living his best life with his beloved cat.

SINCE WHEN: And this is where we ignore the whole romantic escapade with Jenna D'Sora lol. So, N/A (Or since his date of activation).

Tagged by: @lettherebemonsters Tagging: @elaleph (Agnes!), @ensnchekov, @dimensionalspades (Julian!), @quantumstarpaths, @nebulaties (Tasha!), @fasciinating, @storiest0ld (Beverly!) & anyone else who'd like to do this!

[chronophobias]

one of the things about the fact that, "students will always cheat" as an excuse for chatgpt to be used is like. one of the things is, is that when you cheat, ironically, you can still learn something. you're still engaging with the content (you look at answers and write them down, you kinda actually start to remember them and you can figure out how they work, etc.). i remember we would make cheat sheets in class and then i'd be like, "wait, i know this. i don't even need to use this," because the cheatsheet just jogged my memory. but with chatgpt, you don't GET that engagement. you don't even look at the answer for the essay. it's shocking

[failwise]

A cheat sheet for why using ChatGPT is not bad for the environment

Helpful condensed debunk so we can refocus on the real drivers of environmental destruction

[sirfrogsworth]

A few people have been reblogging this old post of mine from 2014.

I was a little worried because technical information is often the very opposite of evergreen content. And I feared this would be full of a bunch of outdated advice. But after looking over it, thankfully, all the main points are still accurate. So that is a relief.

The only changes I might make if I were writing it during present day...

You can just leave "Resample" on "Automatic" and it will choose the best method for you. Changing it to bicubic sharper is just an extra thing to remember and not really necessary. The people who need to use something besides automatic already know all of this and don't need this tutorial.

And I have no idea if the native resolution of modern printers has changed in the past 10 years so you will need to check the printer model you are working with to figure out what ppi it is using. It's likely they are still mostly 300 ppi (360 ppi for Epson), but I have not kept up with that information and cannot say for sure.

Remember the advertised dpi is not the metric you need. You have to do some digging to find the native ppi of the printer. You might be able to ChatGPT it.

And if you are having your image professionally printed you should always ask their preferred document specifications. Often they'll have a cheat sheet you can follow or a FAQ on their website.

I did notice a few people tried to add some information to this post and some of that was... not great.

Someone said that if you work in 300 ppi in Photoshop it could slow down your computer. But Photoshop does not care about the ppi, only the number of pixels in your document. Pixels are what is registered in your computer memory, not the print resolution.

So if you are experiencing laggy behavior, you would need to make sure you are decreasing the total pixel count. You might also try consolidating and reducing the number of layers. A lot of times 300 ppi documents have large pixel dimensions because people aren't paying attention when they are configuring their initial specs, and that could make it seem like 300 ppi docs are slower. But ppi is only relevant to printing.

Another person said 72 ppi is "web resolution." And again, with pictures displayed on a screen the ppi is a nonfactor. So I will reiterate... you can create a 1920x1080 72 ppi document and a 1920x1080 300 ppi document and they will appear the exact same size on your screen and on the web. But if someone tries to print your 300 ppi image from a website, they might get a surprise when it outputs very tiny.

As far as what pixel dimensions to do for web output, I would still vastly oversize your art when creating it and then create a resized version for the web when your image is finalized. It's probably best to research the platform and see what their max image dimensions are and resize your final image to match before publishing. Sometimes that can prevent extra compression when uploading.

In any case, everything else is still current information and hopefully helpful to artists who print things on occasion.

How big should you make your art?

I’ve noticed some digital artists out there who just kind of guess when choosing the dimensions of their artwork. Trying to understand ppi, dpi, print dimensions, and resolution can send you down a rabbit hole of complexity likely to break your brain.  

If you are creating an image only for the web, it is really up to you how big you want to make it. The only relevant dimensions are the pixels. Print size and pixels per inch are of no consequence. A 1920x1080 300ppi image will be the same as a 1920x1080 600ppi image. Your screen only cares about pixel dimensions.

If you plan to print your image, that is where things can get complicated.

Here is the simple version…

First you need to determine the maximum size that your work may be printed. Here are the most commonly used sizes for poster prints. 

Now you need to know the brand of printer that will be used. Typically it will be Epson, HP, or Canon.

For Epson printers…

Input the width and height. 

Input a resolution of 360 pixels per inch.

For Canon, HP, and most other printers…

Input the width and height. 

Input a resolution of 300 pixels per inch.

So let’s say you are in photoshop and you want your art to be printed at 11" x 17" on an Epson printer. This is how you should create your document. 

If you do not know how your work will be printed, I recommend erring on the side of “too big.” If you end up having to enlarge your work, it could result in some quality loss. 

Hypothetical situation…

You don’t know how your work will be printed. So you decide to make your art 24" x 36" at 360 pixels per inch. Your image size dialog box looks like this. 

You find out that the art will be printed at 11" x 17" on a Canon printer. You need to resize your document for optimal sharpness. You’ll want to change the largest dimension value. In this case, 36" is the largest, so you change that to 17". Since it will be a Canon printer, you will need to adjust the resolution to 300 pixels per inch. And because you are making the image smaller, you’ll want to use “bicubic sharper” to maintain the best image quality.  

Now you have to crop off that .333 from the width. That is done in canvas size. 

Hit okay and now you have an 11" x 17" document at 300 pixels per inch ready to print on a Canon printer. 

Getting more technical…

The goal is to size your work so that the printer does not resample your image. Meaning the printer driver doesn’t take your image and make it bigger or smaller. Your image editor is always going to do a better job of resampling than your printer, so if you can set up your document to the native resolution of your printer, it will output with the highest possible sharpness. 

A lot of people see the dpi of printers and think that is its resolution. The manufacturer will even say that is its resolution. It’s not. That is just how many dots it can cram on the page. Many dots make up just one pixel of your image. And the number of pixels your printer can cram on the page is actually its resolution. 

The printer’s resolution is measured in ppi or pixels per inch. You will notice in photoshop it doesn’t actually say dpi. It says pixels per inch. Many, many people use ppi and dpi interchangeably and it is frustrating and confusing for everyone. They aren’t the same thing, but most people say dpi for everything. Even the manufacturers will use dpi incorrectly. To make matters worse, usually printer manuals don’t even list the native pixels per inch. Probably because it is a low number and looks less impressive when marketing. 

Some oddball printers may not use the 300 or 360ppi native resolution. If your images still look soft and you want to be absolutely sure of your printer’s native pixels per inch, the best option is to email the manufacturer about your model. Be very specific about what you are asking. If they give you a crazy high number like 6000 x 12000 dpi, you tell them, “NO, YOU FARTNUGGET. I WANT THE NUMBER OF PIXELS PRINTED IN ONE INCH, NOT THE NUMBER OF DOTS!” If they respond back with something like 400 pixels per inch, then that is the resolution you’ll want to use for your document. 

Epsons typically are 360ppi or 720ppi. Other manufacturers are usually 300ppi or 600ppi. Wide format printers almost always have the lower ppi. The higher ppi’s are typically only used for fine detail vector printouts and you have to set your driver to use that fine detail mode. The nice thing about vector illustrations is that you can alter their dimensions and ppi without any quality loss. You can certainly make your digital paintings at those higher ppi’s, but I’m told there is little quality difference when printing and the files at that resolution can be a lot for your computer to handle. 

Hopefully this was helpful. If you have had problems with images looking soft, I think this might help you get them looking sharp. Take care and make some art. 

[ainewsletter]

Join our Ai community to save time, create better, and grow faster. Delivered every Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday & (Bonus: Sunday). Subscribe for free at https://www.cooldeep.ai/

[aitipsplace]

Advanced ChatGPT Prompt Tutorial (10X Your Productivity With AI)

Get My NEW AI Pro v2.0 Course https://alexanderfyoung.com/7-day-ai-prompt-engineer Get the prompt cheat sheet …

[lazorsandparadox]

I want to be clear that when i say shit like "i endorse cheating in school" i mean that i think its stupid to make shit like written exams closed book and people making and using cheat sheets is fine. We live in an age where you can literally look something up or check notes anywhere and any time in literal seconds, and a lot of stuff does not need to test your ability to memorize, especially if you have an issue like adhd or depression that impacts your ability to memorize. Also, making a cheat sheet for yourself is literally studying. You are still studying, you are just doing it in a way that, for some reason, teachers look down on.

What i do NOT mean when i say "i endorse cheating in schools" is anything where you are literally just making someone else do your work. This is the only possible way you can rob yourself of actually learning anything. 90% of the point of assigning essays is to teach you how to research a topic and then how to effectively present what you found to other people, and you are doing precisely 0 of those things when you use chatgpt or pay someone else to write the essay for you like people did when i was in highschool. And now, more than ever, it is absolutely crucial for you to be able to actually research a topic, vet your sources, and understand how arguments are made, because absolutely everyone is trying to trick you, and you need to learn how to not be tricked. Chatgpt is stupid. Chat gpt does not know how to vet sources and will think anything is true if people say it enough. You cannot rely on it to research for you, and you need to learn to do it yourself.

[jaycafe]

People in my year are cheating on tests by pulling up chatgpt on their phones.. At least put in a bit of ingenuity and hide a cheat sheet somewhere 😭😭

I just started grad school this fall after a few years away from school and man I did not realize how dire the AI/LLM situation is in universities now. In the past few weeks:

I chatted with a classmate about how it was going to be a tight timeline on a project for a programming class. He responded "Yeah, at least if we run short on time, we can just ask chatGPT to finish it for us"

One of my professors pulled up chatGPT on the screen to show us how it can sometimes do our homework problems for us and showed how she thanks it after asking it questions "in case it takes over some day."

I asked one of my TAs in a math class to explain how a piece of code he had written worked in an assignment. He looked at it for about 15 seconds then went "I don't know, ask chatGPT"

A student in my math group insisted he was right on an answer to a problem. When I asked where he got that info, he sent me a screenshot of Google gemini giving just blatantly wrong info. He still insisted he was right when I pointed this out and refused to click into any of the actual web pages.

A different student in my math class told me he pays $20 per month for the "computational" version of chatGPT, which he uses for all of his classes and PhD research. The computational version is worth it, he says, because it is wrong "less often". He uses chatGPT for all his homework and can't figure out why he's struggling on exams.

There's a lot more, but it's really making me feel crazy. Even if it was right 100% of the time, why are you paying thousands of dollars to go to school and learn if you're just going to plug everything into a computer whenever you're asked to think??

[0re0bun]

Interesting article!

[eyepool]

A cheat sheet for why using ChatGPT is not bad for the environment

ChatGPT uses 3 Wh. This is enough energy to:

Leave a single incandescent light bulb on for 3 minutes.

Leave a wireless router on for 30 minutes.

Play a gaming console for 1 minute.

Run a vacuum cleaner for 10 seconds.

Run a microwave for 10 seconds

Run a toaster for 8 seconds

Brew coffee for 10 seconds

Use a laptop for 3 minutes. ChatGPT could write this post using less energy than it takes you to read it.

—Andy Masley

I’ve seen a lot of really inane, uninformed hype on tumblr about how much energy and/or water generative AI uses. Here are some actual facts, lots of them, by someone who knows what they’re talking about. You’re welcome.