Topic: [POLL] Using AI to predict outcomes - page 22. (Read 10042 times)

I agree with you, it's more fun, innit, to use your own mind when making your bets. I can imagine how boring it can become to use AI all the time, especially when everyone will be using it and hence the outcome odds will be decreased to something like 1.02. I  think it will be fun in the early stages, though. During the first couple of month when AI is possible to use for sports betting, it'll be fun, imo.

Very good points.

Regarding animals like dogs, etc, having their own way of telling you things, I agree. My point there is that every living creature will have some kind of response to the environment and their needs. For example, if an animal is hungry, they will look for food, etc. The main difference in humans is that we use our mind to create things that are not directly in response of a biological need. For example we make paintings, art in general, etc. Things that require working for multiple days or years without having a driver like hunger for example. But yeah, I think it's not necessarily something extremely different, just more in the same direction compared to other animals.

In any case, the world we live in is shaped by humans, so that's a big difference, also the online world is mostly humans, and AI. Very few dogs online.

About the AI playing chess, well, the AI always does whatever the human says. The actual way in which the AI does it might be unexpected, but the main objective has been always so far defined by a human. Even dogs and other animals have their own minds to decide what to do and can even ignore a human command. An AI, so far, is still basically a fast computer that gives the illusion of being intelligent, but it does so in a different way than animals. It's kinda like how a plane flies in a different way than a bird flies.

have you heard of... emotions?
energy?

humans are way more unpredictable than machines
you can be really really materialistic and think that there's no soul or spirit, which would be wrong but who am I to judge, and still would be quite hard to create a human from an algo or lines of code simply by the fact that we are quite unpredictable and have some degree of chaos in our composition

It's overhyped when it's about AI. However, it's kind of alarming when the godfather of AI from Google has resigned and there could be some reasons behind it.
Still, we as humans can still go further just as AIs but in terms of gambling, there's no way for them to have that prediction or forecast of something unforeseen.

I agree, if you're for maximum potential, result, and positivities then it's better to be balanced.

Because people are different from complex computer algorithms. Algorithms, no matter how complex, rely on the simple system of 1s and 0s, which has not changed since the invention of computers.

Humans are different, for our very consciousness, even though we do not fully understand it, obviously relies on the open world and its physical laws with our brains being the wetware which receives and processes immeasurable, infinite amounts of information which gives rise to our consciousness. Our own parameters are the very laws of quantum mechanics within which we reside. We are driven by quantum forces while a computer algorithm can only ever be written and interpreted within its predefined framework and parameters.

A program stays a program no matter how similar it becomes to humans. And a computer will never receive any input other than electrical signals. And only in a specific fashion, as well. Even if you were to convert every single physical measurement required into an electrical signal input, it would still only be a poor imitation of our own consciousness.

AI has no consciousness. Its just a neat and useful parlor trick. Maybe quantum computers will be able to bring us real AI. But we are decades away from that.

Using artificial intelligence for predictions is a big mistake in my opinion. I give an example for football. There are thousands of possibilities for a position in the match. All the data obtained according to the logic of artificial intelligence are analyzed and an estimate emerges, but even this is insufficient. Because there is the luck factor. The luck factor makes predictability impossible. So I'm talking about 100% accurate predictability. Otherwise, it is quite normal for him to make inferences and say logical results based on the data at hand.

But we can make artificial intelligence guess for fun. It's also fun to follow. Sometimes I show off to my friends when the correct results come out. Because I was able to make this prediction thanks to artificial intelligence. Still, these predictions should not go beyond entertainment.

It is a very good logic, I have no idea what chatgpt4 is like, but I am Aware that a 20usd subscription for many is nothing, and they will be asking all these types of questions, or they will be looking for a way to make it Credible in order to be able to win, I would not really use it for casinos, in the casinos that you are told you are using or that they suspect of activities it is enough for them not to pay the balance that they have in the casino and thus never Remember it again,That is why the AI in a casino is not viable, I would use it for the lottery to see how good it is to do it and I think that the data at a porbabilistic level could work.

This is the correct way to go about this, there are people out there that are worried about humans being replaced by AI, but the only thing that AI is going to do is to enhance our performance, computers are really good at making calculations and finding patterns that it could take a human their whole life to see.

But humans excel at creative thinking, they can combine completely different concepts and come up with new ideas that would be impossible for a computer to combine, so by combining the two we can get the best of both worlds.

Friend, you talk about it like it's a fact. But in fact, this is not at all the case - people are the same animals as others. Of course, dolphins, monkeys and humans have mutual differences, but if taken as a whole, these are branches of the same tree. And if you have studied human evolution, then you should know that in parallel with the human branch there were other more or less intelligent primates.
And I didn't understand your point about questions - any dog owner will tell you how the pet asks about food, walks, etc. Each of them has its own character and personality.
As for the intentions of the AI, how do you explain that the AI is looking for the best solutions to chess positions, for example? The fact that it is programmed? But it is also possible to program other things, and from the outside you will not distinguish these intentions from the "internal inherent in real personalities."

We can assume some assessment may be correct but as what we all know that it isn't always that we will going to get a winning prediction from AI, gambling always have different outcome even you think you will going to win, even you research well and you fully understand how the game works and what are the advantages from one player or one team to another, there's always shit that can take place.

If luck is not with you, losing your bet is more likely to happen, and that's for sure!

You're both off-target, folks. Sure, humans and algorithms share traits, but they've got unique qualities, too. Humans? Creative powerhouses, innovating like there's no tomorrow. We're box-breakers, tackling fresh challenges head-on. Algorithms? Lightning-fast, data-crunching machines. They bypass human biases and mind glitches. It's not about superiority. It's embracing each other's pros and cons, teaming up for unmatched synergy.

Humans are different to other animals, and probably this will apply to AI as well, in one interesting factor.

Some animals are able to communicate with humans (after training). The main difference is that non-human animals never, ever, have asked a question to a human. It's always a reply.

That might be the same with AI. Basically there is no "intent", the AI is always replying because it has no intrinsic goal. If it has a goal it was defined by the human, so the same applies.

Not sure how or if an AI would eventually decide by itself to start doing something though. If that happens, we are done.

I understand your point, but I do not understand why you think that people are somehow different from complex algorithms? I don't see any difference (fundamental). If the algorithm is given a number of tasks with different priorities (including self-interest - so that it asks for something in return for the work done), then in the end it will also seem to you from the outside that this algorithm has its own will or self-consciousness. Although his "meaningful" actions will only be a balancing act among the priorities of the tasks that are laid down in him.

many basic LLMs like chatGPT 3.5 are not so good with numbers and math too
maybe this was solved in GPT 4 or using the wolfram plugin integration, but I had lots of problems with GPT 3.5 dealing with data sets before and trying to make simple calculations, let alone more complex one

I wouldn't bet a lot of money in their predictions

I think sometimes going with your gut is a good way in gambling too IF you have some years of experience in the field

I haven't tested the Chatgpt yet, so I don't know if it works or needs fixing. But as far as I've read from the article, Chatgpt still needs improvement to provide accurate results or answers. And it seems it also still depends on how hard the developers work to fix it. If they can fix it shortly, perhaps, we will see a significant improvement from Chatgpt. But it looks like that won't happen yet because many still doubt the development of Chatgpt.

With Chatgpt's existing capabilities, it wouldn't be a good idea to rely on it too much, and it's better to stick to the information-seeking we are used to. Until later, Chatgpt is better than now, and then we can try to use it. It's okay if we continue what we've been doing while waiting for updates from the developers.

For sure there are people who had already made out such decision on trying out to follow on what Chatgpt would recommend or would answer out in regarding on their betting which it wouldnt really be ideal on doing so.
So far we arent been able to see to those people who do make out some claims that it does really work, so far there might be some people wont be able to test it out because it wasnt really having that sense no matter on where we do look. We cant just rely our betting choices on just simply asking some AI, yes it does have that huge library which is stored up with lots of information but we know that it cant really be
just that updated or even if it was updated, there are still things which cant really be that determine or be known by an AI on where it would really be needing that human approach and analysis for us to be applied
into our strategy which would  really be used up on the time we do make out some bets. So its a matter of choice and we arent really that dumb on not to notice it out.

I think a sufficiently smart AI might be able to create a pattern of betting for you that is enjoyable in a way, independent of the money making which will always have a negative expected return.

These AIs are already changing everything around us, and gambling will probably be one of the first ones in using these tools.

Can't really blame some gamblers if they use AI for their own good because I know they started trusting to use it because they've got a better outcome compared when they were the ones doing it. But for other gamblers, like us, who seeks entertainment and views every win as an added bonus will surely not ask the AI for some help because in that way, it's not that entertaining anymore as we already put our fate into the hands of AI instead of deciding the likelihood of the outcome ourselves.

We all share our standpoint and our views regarding to this matter but we also know that there are people around who will continue to chase for any possibilities I mean if they feel that AI can give them good analysis then expect them to blindly believe that it will have a higher chance to win the bet.

Just one thing is for sure during our gambling session, it's our hard earned money even it's a spare for entertainment or being allocated to gamble and try winning something out from the house, we still have the control and the final decision making, either to continue chasing for AI's help or just do the usual routine and bet according to our knowledge.

For now, I don't think AI can give an accurate answer because there are still limitations that need further development. So when AI applications are better and can provide the answers we want, we don't have to use them as material or finalization because we also have to compare them with what we find. But it's a different matter if someone depends more on AI and follows the results of the analysis or answers given by AI and immediately places the bet.

It may also happen later. And to use the results, I think it will depend on our judgment because we have to be really responsible with the money we use to gamble. Don't let us regret using AI because we think the technology used is more advanced than now.