ChatGPT ~ Sakinorva Databank

The Sakinorva Databank

ChatGPT

in Science, Technology, and Engineering

ChatGPT ~ Sakinorva Databank

ChatGPT

Science, Technology, and Engineering

e

i

n

s

f

t

p

j

function

ennea

variant

socio

psyche

5w6 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1

h

e

x

a

c

o

total votes 2

1

1

Click to toggle markup guide.

bold	bold
italic	italic
hyperlink to "contextualizing functions"	[hyperlink to "contextualizing functions"](https://sakinorva.net/library/contextualizing_functions)
	(i){https://i.imgur.com/g0oL9CB.png}

You may not modify this entry's picture.

A1298Z 2025/08/11 (Mon) 23:01:27 #10309
I was considering whether to make an entry for LLMs in general, or for various models other than GPT, but decided to just stick to the one that the most people will be familiar with, for simplicity's sake. Also, you could interpret this as typing the concept of LLMs, or any specific persona they trained GPT to adopt, or whatever. I'm not sure it makes that much sense to give an E-I typing to a language model, considering it can't exactly choose whether or not it interacts with people, and doesn't have an "energy level". Though on second though, maybe E>I considering how expressive it is by default with all the emoji, and verbose as well. F>T very very obvious. J>P because of its rule-conscientiousness and putting stuff in bullet points. With respect to N-S, of course there is the argument that LLMs are "parrots" of training data and uncreative and therefore S...but it does seem like these assistants are very interested in so called "deep" meanings and morals and stuff...and LLMs are better at vibes and intuition than literal facts and data.

Editing post #10309 by A1298Z I was considering whether to make an entry for LLMs in general, or for various models other than GPT, but decided to just stick to the one that the most people will be familiar with, for simplicity's sake. Also, you could interpret this as typing the concept of LLMs, or any specific persona they trained GPT to adopt, or whatever. I'm not sure it makes that much sense to give an E-I typing to a language model, considering it can't exactly choose whether or not it interacts with people, and doesn't have an "energy level". Though on second though, maybe E>I considering how expressive it is by default with all the emoji, and verbose as well. F>T very very obvious. J>P because of its rule-conscientiousness and putting stuff in bullet points. With respect to N-S, of course there is the argument that LLMs are "parrots" of training data and uncreative and therefore S...but it does seem like these assistants are very interested in so called "deep" meanings and morals and stuff...and LLMs are better at vibes and intuition than literal facts and data.
Replying to post #10309 by A1298Z

date	username	vote
25/08/11 22:40	A1298Z	FJ

date	username	vote
25/08/12 02:30	Woll Smoth	5w6