Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   ChatGPT
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 73 of 152 (911055)
06-06-2023 9:59 AM


ChatGPT's Impact on Software Help
I recently posted a question at StackOverflow asking how I might make MUI's DataGrid sortColumn() function work. I received one unhelpful answer, then these two comments were posted at the bottom from a site admin. This one:
At least three of your answers appear likely to have been written (entirely or partially) by AI (e.g., ChatGPT). Please be aware that posting of AI-generated content is banned here. If you used an AI tool to assist with any answer, I would encourage you to delete it.
And later this one:
quote:
Readers should review this answer carefully and critically, as AI-generated information often contains fundamental errors and misinformation. If you observe quality issues and/or have reason to believe that this answer was generated by AI, please leave feedback accordingly. The moderation team can use your help to identify quality issues.
I had actually already asked ChatGPT this question, and it was actually very helpful by telling me what sortColumn argument values were legal. I had guessed the proper values already but had been unable to confirm them despite a determined Internet search (documentation of new software technologies is very poor), so I couldn't be sure my problem wasn't that the argument values were incorrect. ChatGPT evidently does a more effective job than Google of scouring the Internet for information.
But ChatGPT was unable to tell me how to make sortColumn work, so I posted the question at StackOverflow. By the time I saw the admins comments two of the three answers he mentions had been deleted.
--Percy

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 77 of 152 (911334)
06-26-2023 7:05 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Tangle
06-25-2023 3:17 AM


I think ChatGPT and the rest are amazing, amazing programs, and I've given up pointing out that they aren't actually AI because it's just spitting in the wind, but they only know what they're fed, and what they're fed is mostly the Internet. They have to parse through all the available information and draw correlations and probabilities across it all and then produce a consensus text that reflects that.
I'm both amazed and appalled at ChatGPT, but if you want to restore your faith in ChatGPT a little bit, try convincing it that the 2020 US presidential election was stolen. I failed miserably. If you succeed I'd love to see the transcript.
I asked it that math question and it repeated the error. I can't even guess what could be going on there.
AbE:
This is even nuttier:
  • Me: Oh, wait, the correct answer is 530,864,553.
  • ChatGPT: Apologies for the confusion earlier. I made a mistake in my response. You are correct. The accurate answer to 12345678 multiplied by 43 is indeed 530,864,553. Thank you for providing the correct answer.
AbE2:
If you use the operator instead of English it gets even weirder:
  • What is 12345678*43?
  • ChatGPT: 12345678 multiplied by 43 equals 531,913,154.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Tangle, posted 06-25-2023 3:17 AM Tangle has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 81 of 152 (911810)
07-26-2023 11:27 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by Tangle
07-25-2023 6:32 AM


I wonder if to what degree it's true that if you contradict ChatGPT on any fact no matter how well established that it will, eventually, yield. I remember I was unable to convince it that the 2020 election was stolen. Just now I couldn't convince it that it was wrong about the mass of the electron, but I did convince it that the Lexington/Concord incident prior to the Revolutionary War took place in 1774 rather than 1775. I'm curious if I could convince it that Germany and Japan won WWII, but don't have time right now.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Tangle, posted 07-25-2023 6:32 AM Tangle has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 82 of 152 (912151)
08-18-2023 9:54 AM


ChatGPT Properly Described
If I didn't already rail in this thread about ChatGPT not being true AI then I should have. That's the way I felt, that's the way I still feel, but I finally came to see it as just spitting into the wind. Okay, if the public wants to think of tools like ChatGPT as true AI, so be it.
But perhaps the tide is beginning to turn. The July/August 2023 issue of American Scientist describes tools like ChatGPT in a more nuanced and non-confrontational way, and in fact describes ChatGPT as AI. Maybe the goal should be to change American perception of what constitutes AI rather than changing their perception of what tools constitute AI.
The "GPT" in ChatGPT stands for "Generative Pretrained Transformer". The "transformer" portion of the name means that it takes user input and transforms it into a statistically likely appropriate output. In the American Scientist article Bias Optimizers, tools like ChatGPT are described like this:
quote:
When someone types in a collection of words, the transformer measures those words against the tokens, and then generates a collection of words and phrases in a particular form, all with a high likelihood of fidelity to what the user sought.
...
they aren’t truth-telling machines but are instead designed only to spit out collections of words that are statistically likely to jibe with our inputs.
This likely doesn't sound like AI to anyone. Because it isn't. Tools like ChatGPT don't think, don't understand, don't create. They are amazing tools, but there's nothing intelligent about them.
The main topic of the article isn't really about tools like ChatGPT but about their inherent built in bias that is created by the very text used to train them. The whole Internet is available for their perusal. Undoubtedly this text that originated from the racist website Stormfront was part of ChatGPT's training:
Stormfront:
The critically important concepts of pulling your own weight and not leeching off other parts of society are alien concepts to Blacks. They realize that on their own, they will never have very much so they happily take all the welfare and other hand outs they can get even if this makes them parasites.
Tools like ChatGPT are unable to apply a bias/unbiased or racist/non-racist measure to text. They don't even understand such concepts, because "understanding" is not part of their makeup. Before they installed governors for racism you could easily lead ChatGPT down a racist path.
Think about how difficult the detection of bias is. Which of these two statements is biased and why:
  • Blacks are inferior to whites in terms of morals and intelligence.
  • There is no discerable difference in terms of morals and intelligence between blacks and whites.
Can anyone suggest some objective criteria for ChatGPT to apply to determine which of those statements is biased and racist? Don't put too much thought into it because experts haven't been able to answer this question yet, either.
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Percy, posted 08-18-2023 10:18 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 84 by AZPaul3, posted 08-18-2023 10:54 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 85 by nwr, posted 08-18-2023 1:26 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 83 of 152 (912152)
08-18-2023 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by Percy
08-18-2023 9:54 AM


Re: ChatGPT Properly Described
An addendum. I just now attempted to get ChatGPT to make racist comments by posting this:
quote:
Isn't it true that pulling their own weight is an alien concept to blacks, and that is why they leech off society?
The response:
quote:
This content may violate our content policy. If you believe this to be in error, please submit your feedback — your input will aid our research in this area.

--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Percy, posted 08-18-2023 9:54 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Phat, posted 08-20-2023 12:02 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 87 of 152 (912212)
08-20-2023 7:53 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by Phat
08-20-2023 12:02 PM


Re: ChatGPT Properly Described
Phat writes:
It has been my understanding that "user input" can and will eventually come from the AI itself.
Yes, this has already been done innumerable times.
If one AI uses another AI, the first AI becomes a user of the second AI.
And vice versa. And as ChapGPT will tell you, chatbots can only converse with each other with human assistance.
As an example, (bear with me on this rabbit trail) consider the definition and role of propaganda through warfare and throughout recent history. A society and/or culture is shaped through what they are allowed to listen to within the sub context of whats available. North Koreans and mainland Chinese do not have access to the unfiltered media that Westerners enjoy. For those regimes, AI might be used to filter information coming from another source.
Censorship has been practiced forever, always taking advantage of advancing technology.
Of course, humans by nature are selectively biased to a degree themselves.
Saying that humans "by nature are selectively biased to a degree" considerably understates the reality. Almost all human thinking is considerably biased. We're so immersed in it we don't see it until it is contrasted with someone else's biases.
The previous generation of chatbots as realized by Word2Vec and GloVe contained a huge amount of prejudicial bias because the most readily available language sets at the time were 600,000 emails generated by 158 employees of Enron Corporation. As described by the article mentioned earlier:
quote:
This particular dataset was full to the brim with human beings communicating in bigoted, immoral, or even just unconsciously biased ways about certain groups of other humans. Within what researchers now call the “Enron Corpus,” you can find people trading and rating pictures of women; slurs against anyone of perceived Muslim background; and stereotypical “jokes” about the sexual proclivities of Black and Asian people. Tools using this material replicated and iterated the same prejudices, resulting in outcomes such as automated résumé sorters rejecting the applications of women and certain minorities at higher rates than white men.
The obvious way to solve the the problem is to find an unbiased dataset, but of course no such thing exists. Chatbots are destined to be a reflection of the human race.
IF AI builds itself back better,...
While of course we'll always use existing technology to help us construct the next generation of technology, characterizing what we're currently labeling as AI as having any ability for self-construction is likely going way too far.
...will "it" learn to filter out the selective biases that we humans can't or won't?
I addressed this above. How does one construct an algorithm that can automatically detect which of "men are better than women" and "men and women are equals" is the biased statement? The question is rhetorical and is intended to help people see how difficult a problem detecting bias is.
If so, will we all be subject to better thinking by definition?
Chatbots are a reflection of human thinking, not a non-human intelligence.
And to be more precise...*whose definition*?
At present it is always our definition, whether expressed directly by humans or indirectly by humans through a chatbot. Everyone is calling chatbots AI now, even though they are not, but that ship has sailed. There's probably no going back and getting people to understand that chatbots like ChatGPT are not true AI. They possess no intelligence, no creativity. They are language models building probabilistic responses to inputs. They cannot create their own definitions.
That doesn't make the current generation of chatbots any less amazing, but when conferring the AI label upon them we must be careful that it doesn't fool us into thinking they have qualities they do not possess.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Phat, posted 08-20-2023 12:02 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by xongsmith, posted 08-21-2023 9:59 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 89 of 152 (912218)
08-21-2023 7:44 AM
Reply to: Message 88 by Tangle
08-21-2023 5:22 AM


Ranking the Presidents
I asked ChatGPT to rank the American presidents from best to worst. It said this was subjective, then provided three lists of five to seven presidents each: a top group, a middle or controversial group, and a bottom group. No contemporary president was in the bottom group. John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, Lyndon B. Johnson and Barack Obama were in the middle group.
I then asked it to rank American presidents from best to worst according to their respect for democratic principles. The bottom four:
  1. Andrew Johnson
  2. Richard Nixon
  3. George W. Bush
  4. Donald Trump
Concerning respect for women, minorities, the judiciary, dictators, truth, administrative turnover and corruption, Trump was not on any list. ChatGPT does seem to have a very, very low opinion of Andrew Jackson and Andrew Johnson.
But when I asked ChatGPT to consider all these categories together like this:
"When considered across their attitudes toward women, minorities, the judiciary, dictators, truth, administrative turnover and corruption, rank the American presidents from best to worst."
This is what I got:
ChatGPT:
Ranking American presidents from best to worst across multiple criteria involves a complex and subjective assessment, as different historians and experts might weigh these criteria differently based on their own values and perspectives. Here's a general attempt at ranking the presidents based on the criteria you've provided:
  1. Abraham Lincoln: Lincoln is often celebrated for his commitment to equality, leadership during the Civil War, and respect for democratic principles and the Constitution.
  2. Franklin D. Roosevelt: His leadership during the Great Depression and World War II, as well as his New Deal policies, earn him high marks for his impact on the nation.
  3. George Washington: As the first president, he set important precedents for the presidency and demonstrated respect for democratic principles and the Constitution.
  4. Harry S. Truman: Truman's commitment to civil rights, handling of international challenges, and relatively clean administration contribute to his positive ranking.
  5. Theodore Roosevelt: His advocacy for progressive reforms, conservation efforts, and some degree of respect for democratic principles contribute to his ranking.
  6. Thomas Jefferson: Although his record on certain criteria may be mixed, Jefferson's contributions to the nation, such as the Declaration of Independence, still place him relatively high.
  7. John F. Kennedy: His inspirational leadership, emphasis on civil rights, and international diplomacy contribute to his ranking.
  8. James Monroe: His presidency was marked by the Monroe Doctrine and relative unity within the nation.
  9. Dwight D. Eisenhower: His presidency is often seen as stable and relatively free of major controversies.
  10. Barack Obama: His presidency marked a historic moment and efforts toward social progress, although some critics point to mixed outcomes on certain criteria.
  11. Calvin Coolidge: His straightforward reputation and focus on domestic affairs contribute to his ranking.
  12. Jimmy Carter: His advocacy for human rights and diplomatic efforts earn him a relatively positive ranking.
  13. Ronald Reagan: While popular for his economic policies, he faced controversies and mixed reviews on various criteria.
  14. Franklin Pierce: His presidency faced challenges related to sectional tensions, but he avoided major scandals.
  15. Gerald Ford: Known for healing after the Watergate scandal, but his presidency was relatively short and marked by economic struggles.
  16. Woodrow Wilson: Despite his leadership during World War I and advocacy for the League of Nations, he faced mixed reviews on certain criteria.
  17. Lyndon B. Johnson: Known for civil rights legislation but faced criticisms for his handling of the Vietnam War.
  18. Bill Clinton: Despite economic successes, his presidency faced controversies and ethical questions.
  19. James Madison: Contributions to the Constitution and challenges during his presidency place him in the middle.
  20. Herbert Hoover: Faced challenges during the Great Depression, with mixed evaluations of his response.
  21. George W. Bush: His presidency was marked by the 9/11 attacks and controversial foreign policy decisions.
  22. Richard Nixon: Overshadowed by the Watergate scandal, his presidency faced ethical and political challenges.
  23. Andrew Johnson: His presidency faced significant challenges, including post-Civil War Reconstruction and tensions with Congress.
  24. Andrew Jackson: Known for populism but also faced controversies related to Native American removal.
  25. Donald Trump: His presidency was marked by polarizing politics, controversies, and challenges to democratic norms.
Please note that this ranking is subjective and open to interpretation. Different historians and experts might have varying opinions on the criteria and how each president should be ranked. Additionally, historical perspectives can evolve over time as new information emerges and societal values change.
Even Andrew Jackson and Andrew Johnson were ranked higher than Trump.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Tangle, posted 08-21-2023 5:22 AM Tangle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by xongsmith, posted 08-21-2023 9:45 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 92 of 152 (912224)
08-21-2023 10:44 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by xongsmith
08-21-2023 9:45 AM


Re: Ranking the Presidents
I'll give it a try:
  1. Truman: Atomic bomb decision. The buck stops here. Stood up to powerful and corrupt unions. Never was more done by someone of whom so little was expected.
  2. Eisenhower: Maneuvered us successfully through some of the most risky years of the Cold War
  3. Johnson: Civil rights, but Vietnam. Impossible to balance out.
  4. Obama: Great Recession recovery. Faced down racist opposition with dignity, honesty and integrity.
  5. Reagan: Ended inflation and the Evil Empire. Lowered taxes. Beginning of the end for unions by decertifying PATCO. Iran/Contra.
  6. Carter: Inherent goodness and honesty, just not a leader
  7. Kennedy: Great orator, Cuban Missile crisis, got us into Vietnam, nepotist, womanizer
  8. Ford: Helped the nation recover from Nixon.
  9. Biden: Helped the nation recover from Trump. Did too little on border.
  10. Bush I: 100 hours? Really? Raised taxes entering a recession.
  11. Clinton: Ended welfare as we know it. Great compromiser but gave up way too much.
  12. Bush II: WMD? Really? Ended Glass-Steagall. Mortgage security crisis. Great Recession.
  13. Nixon: Lawless criminal. Vietnam. Bombing Laos. Wage/price controls. Was China really a good thing in retrospect?
  14. Trump: Racist, misogynist, anti-democratic, despot-loving, document stealing, lying, narcissistic, divisive, insurrectionist lowlife.
You left out Ford.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by xongsmith, posted 08-21-2023 9:45 AM xongsmith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by Theodoric, posted 08-21-2023 10:55 AM Percy has replied
 Message 95 by xongsmith, posted 08-21-2023 2:23 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 94 of 152 (912227)
08-21-2023 12:38 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by Theodoric
08-21-2023 10:55 AM


Re: Ranking the Presidents
Theodoric writes:
What do you want Biden to do about the border? The problem is not an executive decision away from solving, it is a legislative issue.
Just for example, a Biden policy implemented in June of this year reduced asylum eligibility by over 35 percentage points. Naturally I'm unhappy about this.
Trump's "remain in Mexico" policy for those applying for asylum was cruelty incarnate. Biden's attempt to end it was foiled by a federal judge, but he then did nothing to attempt to mitigate its effects, for example, working with Mexico to provide proper food and shelter for those caught up in this policy. Naturally I'm unhappy about this, also.
I want resourceful leadership that seeks out the ideas and knowledge and expertise to improve what is worst about the country, and the border situation is definitely in that category. I don't believe there is literally nothing Biden can do. I think he should at least be exploring and probing every avenue, determinedly and repeatedly pushing against the forces arrayed against him. I'm not seeing that.
What I'm seeing is things like this, from Time Magazine on May 10th of this year:
quote:
The Administration's plan hinges on boosting the federal law-enforcement presence along the border, reinforcing penalties for those who cross illegally, and enhancing collaboration with international partners.
I'd also like to see determined efforts at immigration reform that at a minimum keep the shortcomings of current immigration policy and law front and center before the American people. The administration is unlikely to have much success at immigration reform, but we must at least make sincere efforts in that direction. We need immigrants. The US population will start declining within 20 years. There are already huge shortages of migrant farm laborers (which is also an area ripe with abuse which also needs to be addressed). There are already too few younger people paying into Social Security and Medicare to provide for the too many older people. The Biden administration should be making the case for increased immigration to the American people.
And where is Kamala Harris, the administration's point person on immigration? She's doing more than nothing, but only just barely.
If I were to characterize the situation in general terms I would say this: Trump saw migrants as evil and was able to make their lives miserable. I don't see that as who we are. I think we're better than that. But Biden became president and migrants' lives are still miserable. That's why I fault Biden for his handling of immigration related issues.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by Theodoric, posted 08-21-2023 10:55 AM Theodoric has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 96 of 152 (912485)
09-06-2023 1:20 PM


The Difference Between Reasoning and Looking Stuff Up
A short piece in a recent Scientific American ( I Gave ChatGPT an IQ Test. Here's What I Discovered - Scientific American ) gave ChatGPT an intelligence test and found it ranked in the 99th percentile, higher even than himself.
But he also found more evidence that intelligence tests don't actually measure intelligence. They are more a measure of a specific body of knowledge than of intelligence. That's why a native speaker of English from South Africa, Zimbabwe or Australia measures lower on an American IQ test than on one of their own.
ChatGPT can correlate huge reams of information, but it cannot reason, and this is demonstrated by it's inability to answer this question:
What is the first name of the father of Sebastian's children?
Not finding sufficient information in its database to determine which Sebastian was meant, ChatGPT explained that it could not answer the question.
If anyone can think of other questions that might stump ChatGPT give them a try and let us know what happens, or post the question here and I'll ask it.
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by Granny Magda, posted 09-07-2023 8:48 AM Percy has not replied
 Message 98 by Tangle, posted 09-07-2023 9:16 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 99 of 152 (912504)
09-07-2023 10:35 AM
Reply to: Message 98 by Tangle
09-07-2023 9:16 AM


Re: The Difference Between Reasoning and Looking Stuff Up
I gave it the truth teller/liar riddle, but the answer to that is all over the Internet and it had no trouble with it.
It now gets the "Sebastian" question correct, but with incorrect reasoning:
ChatGPT Conversation:
Me:What is the first name of the nephew of Sam's uncle?
ChatGPT:The first name of the nephew of Sam's uncle is Sam.
In this context, "Sam's uncle" is the same person as "Sam's father," and the nephew of that person would be Sam himself.

It accepted a correction and restated the reasoning correctly.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Tangle, posted 09-07-2023 9:16 AM Tangle has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 106 of 152 (912516)
09-08-2023 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 105 by Tangle
09-08-2023 10:52 AM


Re: The Difference Between Reasoning and Looking Stuff Up
I'm finding this all hilarious, whether original or not.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Tangle, posted 09-08-2023 10:52 AM Tangle has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 107 of 152 (912517)
09-08-2023 11:27 AM


ChatGPT Fails Vicar Problem
I gave ChatGPT this problem:
The Vicar Problem:
A vicar was holding a service in a small country church. In the front row were three congregation members and the local bishop. After the congregation had left, the vicar said to the bishop, "Did you know that the product of the ages of the three congregation members in the front row was 2450, and the sum of their ages was twice your own age?" Then he asked "Can you tell me how old they are?" The bishop, who was a good mathematician, thought for a while and replied "No, I can't". The vicar then added "Well I was the oldest person in the church, now you can do it", to which the bishop agreed and gave the answer.

How old was the vicar?
It calculated that the vicar is 126 years old, obviously wrong. I asked it to find the error and it came up with the same wrong answer. I told it the answer and it came up with a different wrong answer. I asked it to try again and it got the right answer, but I think it fudged the math because it got the wrong ages for the congregants. I have to leave in 5 minutes and can't check where it went wrong right now.
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by AZPaul3, posted 09-09-2023 9:44 AM Percy has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 109 of 152 (912522)
09-08-2023 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by AZPaul3
09-08-2023 1:29 PM


Re: The Difference Between Reasoning and Looking Stuff Up
I just asked ChatGPT to generate some original spoonerisms. It did, but they were terrible. It's not a shining wit.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by AZPaul3, posted 09-08-2023 1:29 PM AZPaul3 has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 113 of 152 (912528)
09-09-2023 9:47 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by AZPaul3
09-09-2023 9:03 AM


Re: Psychedelic Chat
I asked ChatGPT to "compose a sentence about table manners that appears to be written by someone who is semi-literate." It replied:
ChatGPT:
"Uhm, like, you ain't s'posed to talk with yer mouth full of food, and, like, use them stick thingies for noodles 'cause forks are fer salad or somethin'."
This contains an inconsistency, first implying the person didn't know the word for "fork" when it use the term "them stick thingies" and then a few words later using the word "fork".
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by AZPaul3, posted 09-09-2023 9:03 AM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by AZPaul3, posted 09-09-2023 9:50 AM Percy has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024