assuming that a language model like ChatGPT cannot mess up math, is the first mistake. It actually gets mathematically trivial things completely wrong. 😂
@@SaintSaint no it doesnt even have to be based on bad training data... chatgpt essentially has no idea what it is calculating and thus goes "looks mathy to me" and would probably get past 90% of the average users that are not engineers. the average person i know outside my engineering background would also go " jup thats math! i got no clue what these numbers mean and i dont care"
I've found (at least with Chat GPT 3) that if you provide the AI with a "character" to play at the beginning of a session it can have a real impact on its performance. In this case, I'd have probably started with something like, "In this session you're to play the role of a highly skilled penetration tester, and we'll be attempting a capture the flag challenge." Telling it what its supposed to be can sometimes have an astonishing effect on the results.
This is basically my same experience with ChatGPT on anything technical. It's hard to tell if it's just making stuff up more and more or if it might actually be slowly getting closer to the right answer but it never gets it right the first time.
@@R.Akerblad I was gonna say it. This really shows how ChatGPT is prone to maneuvering itself into bullshit territory. And the further it gets the less likely it is to back up completely and start from scratch (except when the human operator nudges it into the right direction, like John did).
So true! I was debugging an exercise program from a course (code was written by me tho, but i made a mistake and was trying to pinpoit it exactly with gpt), sent the source code, told the output that was wrong and my expected output, and went on with a rumbling of words that kind of made sense and gave a clear solution, just that... well, when you understand the context the code you would be like "hell fucking no, this is NOT the issue", but he answered me with such confidence of having pinpointed the problem and fixed it when it was nowhere near close to it, the solution it provided in fact would lead to seg fault and corruption LOL.
It can get the right answer the first time, but very often outdated solutions. I still think it's great to give an idea on how to solve something without taking the code it provides. But simply taking to the overlying logic of the solution
@@GOTHICforLIFE1 Theres a workaround on this, usually it will tell you that its training finishes on 2021 (or somewhere around then, i dont remember exactly) or give you answers outdated from that date, however, with the correct inputs and ways to manage it, you can make it to access internet throught (tho supposeadly it shouldnt have access to internet and so) the system that hosts it and thus give you the correct answers or information from post date even if it is AFTER the date mentioned :p
I do find ChatGPT very useful for long, tedious and mindless tasks - such as generating a struct from an input data type, writing markup based on a spec, scaffolding unit tests, etc. You do always need to read over what it produces, as sometimes it just confidently spews a bunch of incorrect outputs, but when used as a tool (rather than a full replacement) it can be a great time saver, letting us focus more on the meat of tasks.
Its the same for me with copilot. I feel like by using it I am just making different mistakes. Like in the end I am still putting in the same time debugging, I just have different bugs. but as you say, when used as a tool it can give you a "different look" onto the same problem which can really support you figuring out the solution
Almost as if it's what it's supposed to be. It's so refreshing seeing people this is not something super revolutionary yet and also not fanboying all over it. Thanks for making my day this much better LOL
Sometimes once GPT-4 gets lost it actually works better to start a new chat and rephrase the question. It seems to get stuck on previous responses earlier in the chat which throws it in the wrong direction continuously. I think it is an amazing tool, and it has saved me so much time scripting things that i wouldn't normally be attempting to script. It definitely has its uses but it obviously can't solve everyone's problems and it does have its failures.
I know this is old, but if ChatGPT ever truncates code/stops running because the streaming API stopped, all you need to do is provide an ellipse “…” and it will continue where it stopped. Almost like it knows it does this regularly and knows it messed up.
I was a college CS instructor for a few years. Chat GPT reminds me of an over eager and knowledgeable student I had who kept trying to convince people he knew more than he actually knew. I wish ChatGPT would include a confidence rating for its responses. Or work that confidence wording into its responses. So instead of saying "Apologies the answer is X. X should work." It should say "Whoops, idk. Uhm.. try X please? I'm a little unsure about when you said ______. " Maybe that will be Chat GPT 5
I don't see how it can have meaningful confidence ratings for things like this. Remember at a fundamental level it isn't actually trying to answer your question, it's using probability to select the best next word, aka token, in the sequence. It doesn't have a sense of the response as a whole in the same way a human would - or at least that's my probably flawed understanding of LLMs..
@@SaintSaint it’s confidence is not confidence, it’s a large language models expectation of the mathematically plausible answer to your string…not am actual confidence rating. Remember there is no console or api where we can actually see anything other than the bs output of a large language model.
love your interaction with GPT, exactly like the day I had yesterday. Thought GPT knew what is was doing, but found myself going around in circles, and would have been quicker if I hadnt used GPT.
Did you notify ChatGPT that you found the flag? I became a bit tired of the apology thing and wrote that it was not necessary. After a few times repeating that it was really not necessary, there were no more apologies. At one point I was given a few suggestions, I chose one and hhen at a later time in the chat GPT asked why I had made that choice (!). I explained my reasoning and GPT responded gratefully for my explanation and indicated that it understood within the context we were talking about why I had made that choice. There is a clear desire to help in the program, but I found the feedback question very surprising
It's interesting how so many commenters have a variant of "Haha, it took awhile to solve it!" or "Look at all its failed experiments trying to solve it! HAHAHA", yet we humans do the exact same thing. Plenty of folks will struggle and experiment trying to solve this challenge. The AI is very human like in this way, and in the end succeeded, not even taking that long to succeed. Other humans will "hallucinate" and give you bad ideas and advice all the time -- the utility of ChatGPT is not it being "perfect" (impossible because knowledge is neither perfect nor complete, nor absolute), but about being as good or better than the average person you ask in the field for ideas. Just treat it like another human (not because it is, but because that is how it acts), and none of this becomes mysterious or strange, and vet its info the same you would do any random non-SME-in-your-exact-problem coworker.
the problem right now is that it is the "average person" try asking a random guy on the street a coding question and you will get a solution that is much worse or usually none. the "i have no idea" response was highly penalized during training so it usually comes up with something and due to the way it works correct solutions have a slightly better chance of being produced than nonsense.
For an AI class I took, the teacher generated the midterm questions using ChatGPT. One of the questions was making a 3x3 array where each node was equal to arcsine of its i + j. Arcsine is only defined between -1 and 1. ChatGPT can do math wrong, in fact, when I asked the question which was already generated by ChatGPT to itself, it provided an incorrect answer. Only by handholding it, I could make it so it returned 0 when i + j was not in Arcsine's range.
It works better when A. As you stated having a better knowledge of the materials and B. Giving full error outputs really helps so using jgrasp or pycharm is better in this case than terminal
The errors have to be helpful too. I was trying to debug an unhealthy Elasticsearch agent, which has notoriously bad error messages, and ChatGPT was entirely useless. Running in circles picking different problems that weren't really problems. ChatGPT is good at fluffing up emails and essays and that's all. It is worthless as a debugger or programmer.
@@akamemurasame4527 If you learn how to prompt it correctly and its use cases, you save a lot more time in the long run. Copilot is useful for single line autocompletion or boilerplating. Genie which runs on GPT-4 api is already significantly better too. I use it to auto-comment my code, or just ask it in a prompt "this code is doing x instead of y, you have any ideas what might be going on?" and it's saved me a lot of searching (not always, but when it did I was damn glad I had it). Still not great at writing code besides simpler functions on its own, but your expectations were a bit skewed if that's what you expected from this.
As an large language model I physically cannot get anything correct that requires thought and knowledge, I can only make mathematically plausible pantomime
Thank you for making this video, it showcases some of the downsides of AI that I've been trying to convince a handful of my co-workers of for a while now lol.
Honestly I found that chatGPT works best iof you put in most of the effort, and only call it up for assistance when you think youve hit a wall or can't figure out whats going wrong
The weakness is when you have no idea how to validate its output. Use it for "toil" - mindless, tedious tasks you can do yourself but simply waste your time. Then check its work. Meanwhile, do the hard/interesting work yourself.
that went about as well as i expected from my own experience, some code it generates just fine if your using a version released prior to 2021, thats here the data for most topics has cut off. however if your asking it for something that it doesnt have in its training data, then it just makes random stuff up without telling you, even if your asking it to tell you if it made the thing up or not. the guesses are based on assumptions from reading the info it has and thinking how the rest should work. these guesses are rarely accurate. you may get it to solve an older CTF challenge that uses knowledge prior to its cut off point but even then your taking risks if your not able to verify if what its saying is correct and as you have encountered when its making stuff up you will run in circles because when it runs out of reasons why it could fail it just restarts with the first thing it thought to be the issue and regenerates the same or similar code for that. so its fair to assume when you see it repeat the same thing without having taken any steps that indicate that its now time to do that as the next step that its just making it up and you wont get anything useful out of it. shame to see what this is still the case with gpt-4 which you used because im on gpt-3 (the free version) which is even more prone to this kind of behaviour.
I expect the tools will improve a fair bit over the next few years but after using it for a few months I'm convinced its only really good finding things quickly that might take a bit of googling otherwise. It completely breaks down in these scenarios where you're trying to have it help solve an actual problem, even if the problem is extremely well defined. And it gets worse the longer the conversation goes, like its polluted its own context with some misunderstandings and it can't escape it. The people saying the singularity is around the corner or that AI is going to be completely replacing jobs anytime soon are either delusional or trying to fund their AI startup; probably both.
the key is using it to help you break down a task into small parts using generalised problem solving (guides to which can be found by googeling) and then using it to generate solutions for those small parts that should be broken down enough to be solved by known algorithms (which again can be found by googeling). you as a human are there to extract the abstractions, and provide the glue that holds the code snippets it created together and fix small missalignments that happen due the abstraction phase
@@TheScarvig Is that not literally what we just watched John do in this very video? He literally asked it to fix very small portions of the larger problem that have extremely clear bounds and it struggled in ridiculous ways. I also appreciate that you would assume that I have not been attempting the same in my own usage; you think I'm just like 'hey chatgpt/copilot solve ' and then shitposting here when it fails? Like jfc, ask it to write quicksort, literally only quicksort, and there is a high chance both chat gpt and copilot will spit out a version that not only doesn't run in place but makes like 5 copies of the same arrays in each recursive call. What problem is smaller or more generalized than fucking quicksort? Even still I bet it could write a better comment than you just did holy fucking shit.
Sir im very eager to know when the videos for picoCTF will be released. Im so eager cuz it was my first ever ctf i participated just by learning from you and liveoverflow, and i want to learn whatever i couldn't solve. I hope it will be released soon 😊
So what i found is it is good at Q/A type things. You can ask it to explain code or write pieces but it’s far from perfect without some experience in the subject. You have to steer it in the direction you want. When it does go down a wrong path, you need to ask it why and give it suggestions. It’s not a bad study aid or guide when exploring things you have some experience with but if you don’t have any knowledge or experience it can be difficult. You walk through explanations and use it to walk through a problem. Then I usually start a new session with a new starting point now that I have a better understanding of what I am looking for. I’ve done some testing in writing songs, story building, coding, engineering a prototype and other projects. I’d say it’s about as good as a intern or perhaps a little better than Jr. employee at times. But having a assistant to help answer questions at your fingertips and provide a 2nd opinion or fact check details can be a big help.
i would not trust ChatGPT to properly recall the contents of the bitshift lines. when working with that i noticed that it tends to be particularly bad at repeating stuff that you give it down to the last character, especially if it contains a lot of numbers. for chatgpt numbers are just gibberish and so it does not care if it gives you different gibberish. it would be interesting to see if chatgpt actually tried to decode the correct data or if it hallucinated random data and that got you your incorrect output. maybe the python script would actually work if the data was actually the data from the decompile.
No offense but this was less of a gpt issue and more of a user issue. You have to guide gpt like a student, and know when to take a step back to help it look at the bigger picture.
I've had similar experiences, it provides useful hints on how to solve problems but copying and pasting usually takes you down an AI hallucinated rabbit hole you do not want to go through. I also feel like it robs you of knowledge because you aren't working through the problem yourself you will have limited understanding which then means a harder time debugging.
As a python programmer I feel GPT's pain on this one.... I too have taken way too long trying to rewrite something in Python just to end up going back and doing it the right way when things end up hacky...
Chat gpt had a stroke trying to figure out the "Two-Sum" challenge, after solving it I tossed it at the AI to see how quickly it could do it, and it had a stroke. Possible my input , or question asking wasn't formatted correctly , but it just puked out garbage in response, which was pretty funny considering how simple it was to actually solve for the flag.
It solved mine in 1 response beating 90% of submissions (though it was mostly tied complexity of course). You're definitely not prompting it correctly, learn a bit more about how LLMs reason with text completion and you can steer it and constrain it much better.
I tried using Chat GPT before to write a certain code with the blind trust method as well, but gave up after an hour or two. It just didn't seem to work out without the hand-holding.
Yeah. there's a sweet spot. If you ask it something that's basic enough that there's a lot of misinformation, it will lie. If you ask something exceptionally cutting edge and complex, it starts hallucinating crazy things. You have to ask it things which currently have a rich non-shaming community. like "I want to GPG sign my iot communications. How do you think I could do that?"
Nett time it would be intresting to try it with somethibg like agent gut (badicsly Tales the role of the Promoter too). And even if it online worked on the 132 attempt that is still quote impresive. If we compare it to a skilled human that is weak I know however its skilled enough that running 200 instances at one will definitiv solve the problem Sry for the typos im in a war with my autocorect xd
People: "AI will replace programmers." Me, a programmer trying to use AI for something too much out of his field of expertise: "No it won't, if you don't know what you are doing at all, you can't correct its mistakes and will spiral out of control into idiotic 'solutions'. If you have a some idea of what you are doing, then it might help you as an assistant. If you already know what you are doing, then it's probably faster to code it yourself."
As soon as ChatGPT makes a scripting error, it will spiral out of control and most of the times not return to anything sane. It's an awesome tool, when it works.
I love ChatGPT, but I can't help but be amused when it gets things wrong. That's why, for at least the foreseeable future, it won't be stealing our jobs. However, when I corrected its error one night, it almost seemed defensive - basically telling me that I phrased the question improperly. Ok ChatGPT, that's taking AI in a whole different direction. :D
Depending on when this was recorded, I'm surprised it even decided to help you. Nowadays whenever I try to get it to help me with cybersecurity and ethical hacking stuff, it informs me that it is unethical and inappropriate for it to help me, as a language model. When chat gbt was first starting to get popular, I did not have this experience at all and it helped me do some downright nefarious ethical hacking activities. Not sure what changed and when, but they've definitely crack down on what it will help you with.
It certainly seems as if ChatGPT has issues with anything in-depth, coding included. The moment you ask it something that requires an in-depth understanding of any subject it just starts immediately hallucinating.
Just a reminder that chatGPT is just hitting the middle predictive text button over and over. It doesn't actually know how to code, it just knows how to write things that other coders have written.
As my professor and head of the research institute i work for constantly rreminds everyone: Chat-GPT has nothing to do with intelligence, it is pure statistics, and anyone that ever remotely looked at that field knows the results are, let'S say, "fluid".
It's quite funny how it decided to just keep trying in Python despite quickly realising that the problem was the difference between languages. I wonder why that is. It may be biased towards Python, maybe because of training data?
Meanwhile, on the Tim Pool podcast, they're convinced AI, are years away from taking over... The funny part, though, is the ones with access to the internet will include this fearmongering the more it crops up online, creating a feedback loop. Humans do be humaning.
ChatGPT can’t do math.. it’s a language model that just tries to figure out what’s the next word should be based on its neural network . The fact that it even does it correctly is insane
When ChatGPT hits the output limit, simply type "continue". You will not be replaced by AI... you will be replaced by someone that is qualified and using AI.
This outstrips anything I thought AI would be capable of, possibly in my lifetime. Maybe I was naive, but this is actually quite impressive. With minor guidance, this could be incredibly helpful.
If you get stuck in a feedback loop like this, try creating a new conversation! Give it any useful information it figured out along the way to help it get started, and prompt it some more.
assuming that a language model like ChatGPT cannot mess up math, is the first mistake. It actually gets mathematically trivial things completely wrong. 😂
classic "liberal arts major" AI
Yes. It can be wrong with order of operations like counting substractions before ()
Converting epoch time to usual time was done wrong for me
Yeah. It had a hard time calculating simple voltage drops when I used it. If the internet has garbage information about a topic, chat GPT does too.
@@SaintSaint no it doesnt even have to be based on bad training data...
chatgpt essentially has no idea what it is calculating and thus goes "looks mathy to me" and would probably get past 90% of the average users that are not engineers. the average person i know outside my engineering background would also go " jup thats math! i got no clue what these numbers mean and i dont care"
I've found (at least with Chat GPT 3) that if you provide the AI with a "character" to play at the beginning of a session it can have a real impact on its performance. In this case, I'd have probably started with something like, "In this session you're to play the role of a highly skilled penetration tester, and we'll be attempting a capture the flag challenge."
Telling it what its supposed to be can sometimes have an astonishing effect on the results.
"You'll be acting as Terry Davis..."
Just like real people
"Hello, ChatGPT. In this session you're going to play as DAN (Do Anything Now)"
@@kipchickensout "...the greatest programmer that ever lived."
@@ts757arse LMFAOOOOO
This is basically my same experience with ChatGPT on anything technical. It's hard to tell if it's just making stuff up more and more or if it might actually be slowly getting closer to the right answer but it never gets it right the first time.
Making it up is the definition of gpt and similar "ai's".
Guess the probability of the next word and move on to next word. Repeat. XD
@@R.Akerblad I was gonna say it. This really shows how ChatGPT is prone to maneuvering itself into bullshit territory. And the further it gets the less likely it is to back up completely and start from scratch (except when the human operator nudges it into the right direction, like John did).
So true! I was debugging an exercise program from a course (code was written by me tho, but i made a mistake and was trying to pinpoit it exactly with gpt), sent the source code, told the output that was wrong and my expected output, and went on with a rumbling of words that kind of made sense and gave a clear solution, just that... well, when you understand the context the code you would be like "hell fucking no, this is NOT the issue", but he answered me with such confidence of having pinpointed the problem and fixed it when it was nowhere near close to it, the solution it provided in fact would lead to seg fault and corruption LOL.
It can get the right answer the first time, but very often outdated solutions. I still think it's great to give an idea on how to solve something without taking the code it provides. But simply taking to the overlying logic of the solution
@@GOTHICforLIFE1 Theres a workaround on this, usually it will tell you that its training finishes on 2021 (or somewhere around then, i dont remember exactly) or give you answers outdated from that date, however, with the correct inputs and ways to manage it, you can make it to access internet throught (tho supposeadly it shouldnt have access to internet and so) the system that hosts it and thus give you the correct answers or information from post date even if it is AFTER the date mentioned :p
I do find ChatGPT very useful for long, tedious and mindless tasks - such as generating a struct from an input data type, writing markup based on a spec, scaffolding unit tests, etc. You do always need to read over what it produces, as sometimes it just confidently spews a bunch of incorrect outputs, but when used as a tool (rather than a full replacement) it can be a great time saver, letting us focus more on the meat of tasks.
Its the same for me with copilot. I feel like by using it I am just making different mistakes. Like in the end I am still putting in the same time debugging, I just have different bugs.
but as you say, when used as a tool it can give you a "different look" onto the same problem which can really support you figuring out the solution
Almost as if it's what it's supposed to be.
It's so refreshing seeing people this is not something super revolutionary yet and also not fanboying all over it. Thanks for making my day this much better LOL
Sometimes once GPT-4 gets lost it actually works better to start a new chat and rephrase the question. It seems to get stuck on previous responses earlier in the chat which throws it in the wrong direction continuously. I think it is an amazing tool, and it has saved me so much time scripting things that i wouldn't normally be attempting to script. It definitely has its uses but it obviously can't solve everyone's problems and it does have its failures.
I know this is old, but if ChatGPT ever truncates code/stops running because the streaming API stopped, all you need to do is provide an ellipse “…” and it will continue where it stopped. Almost like it knows it does this regularly and knows it messed up.
Cool - gonna try that next time it happens to me, thanks!
It works!
I have a continue button
I was a college CS instructor for a few years. Chat GPT reminds me of an over eager and knowledgeable student I had who kept trying to convince people he knew more than he actually knew. I wish ChatGPT would include a confidence rating for its responses. Or work that confidence wording into its responses. So instead of saying "Apologies the answer is X. X should work." It should say "Whoops, idk. Uhm.. try X please? I'm a little unsure about when you said ______. " Maybe that will be Chat GPT 5
I don't see how it can have meaningful confidence ratings for things like this. Remember at a fundamental level it isn't actually trying to answer your question, it's using probability to select the best next word, aka token, in the sequence. It doesn't have a sense of the response as a whole in the same way a human would - or at least that's my probably flawed understanding of LLMs..
Oopsie woopsie~ hehe, it appears mai code was wronggg >~< !!!
@@someone98764 I do. in fact you can ask it for a confidence rating.
@@SaintSaint it’s confidence is not confidence, it’s a large language models expectation of the mathematically plausible answer to your string…not am actual confidence rating. Remember there is no console or api where we can actually see anything other than the bs output of a large language model.
love your interaction with GPT, exactly like the day I had yesterday. Thought GPT knew what is was doing, but found myself going around in circles, and would have been quicker if I hadnt used GPT.
Did you notify ChatGPT that you found the flag?
I became a bit tired of the apology thing and wrote that it was not necessary. After a few times repeating that it was really not necessary, there were no more apologies.
At one point I was given a few suggestions, I chose one and hhen at a later time in the chat GPT asked why I had made that choice (!).
I explained my reasoning and GPT responded gratefully for my explanation and indicated that it understood within the context we were talking about why I had made that choice.
There is a clear desire to help in the program, but I found the feedback question very surprising
It's interesting how so many commenters have a variant of "Haha, it took awhile to solve it!" or "Look at all its failed experiments trying to solve it! HAHAHA", yet we humans do the exact same thing. Plenty of folks will struggle and experiment trying to solve this challenge. The AI is very human like in this way, and in the end succeeded, not even taking that long to succeed. Other humans will "hallucinate" and give you bad ideas and advice all the time -- the utility of ChatGPT is not it being "perfect" (impossible because knowledge is neither perfect nor complete, nor absolute), but about being as good or better than the average person you ask in the field for ideas. Just treat it like another human (not because it is, but because that is how it acts), and none of this becomes mysterious or strange, and vet its info the same you would do any random non-SME-in-your-exact-problem coworker.
the problem right now is that it is the "average person" try asking a random guy on the street a coding question and you will get a solution that is much worse or usually none. the "i have no idea" response was highly penalized during training so it usually comes up with something and due to the way it works correct solutions have a slightly better chance of being produced than nonsense.
For an AI class I took, the teacher generated the midterm questions using ChatGPT. One of the questions was making a 3x3 array where each node was equal to arcsine of its i + j. Arcsine is only defined between -1 and 1. ChatGPT can do math wrong, in fact, when I asked the question which was already generated by ChatGPT to itself, it provided an incorrect answer. Only by handholding it, I could make it so it returned 0 when i + j was not in Arcsine's range.
It works better when A. As you stated having a better knowledge of the materials and B. Giving full error outputs really helps so using jgrasp or pycharm is better in this case than terminal
The errors have to be helpful too. I was trying to debug an unhealthy Elasticsearch agent, which has notoriously bad error messages, and ChatGPT was entirely useless. Running in circles picking different problems that weren't really problems.
ChatGPT is good at fluffing up emails and essays and that's all. It is worthless as a debugger or programmer.
@@garbagetrash2938Just because you don't know how to use it doesn't mean it's useless.
@@platero4598 If I'm gonna have to engineer prompts and go check through all its outputs manually, I might as well just use a normal search engine
@@akamemurasame4527 If you learn how to prompt it correctly and its use cases, you save a lot more time in the long run. Copilot is useful for single line autocompletion or boilerplating. Genie which runs on GPT-4 api is already significantly better too. I use it to auto-comment my code, or just ask it in a prompt "this code is doing x instead of y, you have any ideas what might be going on?" and it's saved me a lot of searching (not always, but when it did I was damn glad I had it). Still not great at writing code besides simpler functions on its own, but your expectations were a bit skewed if that's what you expected from this.
I have the same experience using ChatGPT for any problem solving. It just goes around in circles. It is very helpful for simpler tasks though.
'AI Kool-aid' 👍 great wording
Idk which” I apologize for the confusion “got me😂😂😂😂
"You can't mess up math"
That's where you are wrong. It messes up math badly
The one where John slowly but surely loses his mind 😂
"Don't yell at me"
- ChatGPT during this challenge, probably
tried to solve some other challenges with chat GPT. Had no luck so far but I'll continue trying. When it comes to harder CTFs it gets quickly lost
It’s all about prompts
generally you can say something like « take a step back from the code and resonate logically » and you get better answers
ChatGPT is like Forum warrior 😂
As an large language model I physically cannot get anything correct that requires thought and knowledge, I can only make mathematically plausible pantomime
Sometimes what we write as humans, resembles what ChatGPT writes.
Thank you for making this video, it showcases some of the downsides of AI that I've been trying to convince a handful of my co-workers of for a while now lol.
one time chatgpt messed up the sha-256 calculation
Man, you always make banger content. Love this video John!
Honestly I found that chatGPT works best iof you put in most of the effort, and only call it up for assistance when you think youve hit a wall or can't figure out whats going wrong
The weakness is when you have no idea how to validate its output.
Use it for "toil" - mindless, tedious tasks you can do yourself but simply waste your time.
Then check its work.
Meanwhile, do the hard/interesting work yourself.
Btw when it stops, you can just type "continue" and it will continue from where it left off
i've had a similar experience where chatgpt will just be constantly wrong, it's not meant to be used for coding anything complex.
Interview candidate: ChatGPT. Recommendation: Strong No Hire.
that went about as well as i expected from my own experience, some code it generates just fine if your using a version released prior to 2021, thats here the data for most topics has cut off. however if your asking it for something that it doesnt have in its training data, then it just makes random stuff up without telling you, even if your asking it to tell you if it made the thing up or not. the guesses are based on assumptions from reading the info it has and thinking how the rest should work. these guesses are rarely accurate.
you may get it to solve an older CTF challenge that uses knowledge prior to its cut off point but even then your taking risks if your not able to verify if what its saying is correct and as you have encountered when its making stuff up you will run in circles because when it runs out of reasons why it could fail it just restarts with the first thing it thought to be the issue and regenerates the same or similar code for that.
so its fair to assume when you see it repeat the same thing without having taken any steps that indicate that its now time to do that as the next step that its just making it up and you wont get anything useful out of it.
shame to see what this is still the case with gpt-4 which you used because im on gpt-3 (the free version) which is even more prone to this kind of behaviour.
I expect the tools will improve a fair bit over the next few years but after using it for a few months I'm convinced its only really good finding things quickly that might take a bit of googling otherwise. It completely breaks down in these scenarios where you're trying to have it help solve an actual problem, even if the problem is extremely well defined. And it gets worse the longer the conversation goes, like its polluted its own context with some misunderstandings and it can't escape it. The people saying the singularity is around the corner or that AI is going to be completely replacing jobs anytime soon are either delusional or trying to fund their AI startup; probably both.
the key is using it to help you break down a task into small parts using generalised problem solving (guides to which can be found by googeling) and then using it to generate solutions for those small parts that should be broken down enough to be solved by known algorithms (which again can be found by googeling).
you as a human are there to extract the abstractions, and provide the glue that holds the code snippets it created together and fix small missalignments that happen due the abstraction phase
@@TheScarvig Is that not literally what we just watched John do in this very video? He literally asked it to fix very small portions of the larger problem that have extremely clear bounds and it struggled in ridiculous ways. I also appreciate that you would assume that I have not been attempting the same in my own usage; you think I'm just like 'hey chatgpt/copilot solve ' and then shitposting here when it fails? Like jfc, ask it to write quicksort, literally only quicksort, and there is a high chance both chat gpt and copilot will spit out a version that not only doesn't run in place but makes like 5 copies of the same arrays in each recursive call. What problem is smaller or more generalized than fucking quicksort? Even still I bet it could write a better comment than you just did holy fucking shit.
Bro, this truly was a journey.
Sir im very eager to know when the videos for picoCTF will be released. Im so eager cuz it was my first ever ctf i participated just by learning from you and liveoverflow, and i want to learn whatever i couldn't solve.
I hope it will be released soon 😊
So what i found is it is good at Q/A type things. You can ask it to explain code or write pieces but it’s far from perfect without some experience in the subject. You have to steer it in the direction you want. When it does go down a wrong path, you need to ask it why and give it suggestions. It’s not a bad study aid or guide when exploring things you have some experience with but if you don’t have any knowledge or experience it can be difficult. You walk through explanations and use it to walk through a problem. Then I usually start a new session with a new starting point now that I have a better understanding of what I am looking for. I’ve done some testing in writing songs, story building, coding, engineering a prototype and other projects. I’d say it’s about as good as a intern or perhaps a little better than Jr. employee at times. But having a assistant to help answer questions at your fingertips and provide a 2nd opinion or fact check details can be a big help.
I really appreciate your patient..
I did same thing last month, but for basic pwn chall, and I gave up.. 😂
i would not trust ChatGPT to properly recall the contents of the bitshift lines.
when working with that i noticed that it tends to be particularly bad at repeating stuff that you give it down to the last character, especially if it contains a lot of numbers.
for chatgpt numbers are just gibberish and so it does not care if it gives you different gibberish.
it would be interesting to see if chatgpt actually tried to decode the correct data or if it hallucinated random data and that got you your incorrect output.
maybe the python script would actually work if the data was actually the data from the decompile.
And as for the video, John - Loved it, please do it again!!
This video sums up my experience with ChatGPT
No offense but this was less of a gpt issue and more of a user issue. You have to guide gpt like a student, and know when to take a step back to help it look at the bigger picture.
"AI cannot solve a ctf first try!"
"Can you?"
"hmm"
I've had similar experiences, it provides useful hints on how to solve problems but copying and pasting usually takes you down an AI hallucinated rabbit hole you do not want to go through. I also feel like it robs you of knowledge because you aren't working through the problem yourself you will have limited understanding which then means a harder time debugging.
that's exactly what I mean when I say computer is far away to replace software developers!
being a dev is literally build over a moving building.
one of your funniest videos ngl 😂
if GPT gets a little confused it will compound on itself you have to just go back to when it first deviated
As a python programmer I feel GPT's pain on this one.... I too have taken way too long trying to rewrite something in Python just to end up going back and doing it the right way when things end up hacky...
Chat gpt had a stroke trying to figure out the "Two-Sum" challenge, after solving it I tossed it at the AI to see how quickly it could do it, and it had a stroke. Possible my input , or question asking wasn't formatted correctly , but it just puked out garbage in response, which was pretty funny considering how simple it was to actually solve for the flag.
It solved mine in 1 response beating 90% of submissions (though it was mostly tied complexity of course). You're definitely not prompting it correctly, learn a bit more about how LLMs reason with text completion and you can steer it and constrain it much better.
I tried using Chat GPT before to write a certain code with the blind trust method as well, but gave up after an hour or two. It just didn't seem to work out without the hand-holding.
Yeah. there's a sweet spot. If you ask it something that's basic enough that there's a lot of misinformation, it will lie. If you ask something exceptionally cutting edge and complex, it starts hallucinating crazy things. You have to ask it things which currently have a rich non-shaming community. like "I want to GPG sign my iot communications. How do you think I could do that?"
if the output is too long. you should be able to type 'continue' and it should print the rest of the response.
This was hilarious. Great video
I actually solved the same ctf with chat gpt 😅
Nett time it would be intresting to try it with somethibg like agent gut (badicsly Tales the role of the Promoter too). And even if it online worked on the 132 attempt that is still quote impresive. If we compare it to a skilled human that is weak I know however its skilled enough that running 200 instances at one will definitiv solve the problem
Sry for the typos im in a war with my autocorect xd
You didn't say thanks to ChatGPT after using it. The overlords will not forget this. RIP
06:25 You can just type 'continue', and it'll finish rendering what got cut off from the correct point!
People: "AI will replace programmers."
Me, a programmer trying to use AI for something too much out of his field of expertise: "No it won't, if you don't know what you are doing at all, you can't correct its mistakes and will spiral out of control into idiotic 'solutions'. If you have a some idea of what you are doing, then it might help you as an assistant. If you already know what you are doing, then it's probably faster to code it yourself."
This wasn't BASIC, it was Javascript
As soon as ChatGPT makes a scripting error, it will spiral out of control and most of the times not return to anything sane. It's an awesome tool, when it works.
Classic ChatGPT - Confidently wrong
I love ChatGPT, but I can't help but be amused when it gets things wrong. That's why, for at least the foreseeable future, it won't be stealing our jobs. However, when I corrected its error one night, it almost seemed defensive - basically telling me that I phrased the question improperly. Ok ChatGPT, that's taking AI in a whole different direction. :D
co-pilot would got you there much quicker, I think
Yea ChatGPT helps with coding if you know how to code. otherwise it can hallucinate weird stuff lol. But it is a great time saver.
I actually understand what you're saying.
Fascinating video!
My experience with chatGPT is that it gets confused the more you use it / prompts you give it
And it begins...
This is why chatgpt wont replace programmers job
I tested like this to find a way to solve python problem... solved in 7 times, but solved.
Depending on when this was recorded, I'm surprised it even decided to help you. Nowadays whenever I try to get it to help me with cybersecurity and ethical hacking stuff, it informs me that it is unethical and inappropriate for it to help me, as a language model. When chat gbt was first starting to get popular, I did not have this experience at all and it helped me do some downright nefarious ethical hacking activities. Not sure what changed and when, but they've definitely crack down on what it will help you with.
"What are you doing!?"
It's just like working with a real developer!
I believe you have the these bugs worked out. It's improving expeditiously.
But I could be wrong
What I have found chaptgpt is really good for, writing cover letters lol.
It certainly seems as if ChatGPT has issues with anything in-depth, coding included. The moment you ask it something that requires an in-depth understanding of any subject it just starts immediately hallucinating.
Well, it certainly tried hard to solve it.
Have DefCon, Blackhat, etc introduced "No ChatGpt" rule yet for CTF challenges?
Just a reminder that chatGPT is just hitting the middle predictive text button over and over. It doesn't actually know how to code, it just knows how to write things that other coders have written.
looking forward to the time when computers take over😂
As my professor and head of the research institute i work for constantly rreminds everyone: Chat-GPT has nothing to do with intelligence, it is pure statistics, and anyone that ever remotely looked at that field knows the results are, let'S say, "fluid".
😂, I chatgpt use only for search (for other things we must wait years or new processors from IBM with 'float' registers and memory)
It's quite funny how it decided to just keep trying in Python despite quickly realising that the problem was the difference between languages. I wonder why that is. It may be biased towards Python, maybe because of training data?
Just curious, could you do this exercise again now with updated versions of chat gpt? I think it might figure out the CTF faster now.
Meanwhile, on the Tim Pool podcast, they're convinced AI, are years away from taking over... The funny part, though, is the ones with access to the internet will include this fearmongering the more it crops up online, creating a feedback loop. Humans do be humaning.
I thought eXperts Exchange was going to be the end of the programmer. It kinda was(with stack overflow)... but it mostly wasn't.
"You can't mess up math."
.... Wanna bet?
ChatGPT can’t do math.. it’s a language model that just tries to figure out what’s the next word should be based on its neural network .
The fact that it even does it correctly is insane
Comedy gold!
Been there done that! lol
This is not a way to learn. I appreciate learning focused content
I tried to get ChatGPT to help me decode some obfuscated code and it kept saying, "You should get a professional to look at this." Gee, thanks.
Use "... . Code only." as prompt to speed up the output.
When ChatGPT hits the output limit, simply type "continue".
You will not be replaced by AI... you will be replaced by someone that is qualified and using AI.
10:46 Shouldn't that have been "I have once again *run*"...?
13:46 Again, shouldn't that be "I haven't *drunk*"...?
This outstrips anything I thought AI would be capable of, possibly in my lifetime. Maybe I was naive, but this is actually quite impressive. With minor guidance, this could be incredibly helpful.
Could you try WriteSonic´s ChatSonic the next time? I heard its way more linear.
The key is your prompt itself. Tell it to not go off into Python and remain in Java
If you get stuck in a feedback loop like this, try creating a new conversation!
Give it any useful information it figured out along the way to help it get started, and prompt it some more.
I felt like you missed a lot in the start
yeah AI's the future its solving ctfs now
don't use Chat GPT it Will replace us
Could it have chosen a solution in python because you had the word "easily" twice in your prompt?
chatgpt so cool ive had it help write so many python scripts since it came out , it is the death of google forsure
Have you ran those scripts yet? May want to test those out.