Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Tillinghast has an amazing memory and he has great attention to details, even minutia. He needs that to hold 800 stocks, and rumors are that if asked questions on ANY one of them, he can answer without checking notes.
So, I found fascinating his example of how he "beat" ChatGPT on Perry Mason (that was my favorite TV show too at one time). He asked ChatGPT how many murderers on Perry Mason were women? ChatGPT said more than 1 BECAUSE nobody has a database of stuff like this to feed into ChatCPT, and that is certainly a correct answer, but not very insightful. But BY Tillinghast's count, there were at least 260 Perry Mason episodes with women murderers! He uses this example to point out that generative AI cannot do any original thinking, but only make conclusions based on the data it has been fed.
@Yogibearbull said, He uses this example to point out that generative AI cannot do any original thinking, but only make conclusions based on the data it has been fed.
He is a good example of a critical thinker - able to talk about his biggest investment mistake. I will miss Joel Tillinghast who seldom gives interviews and shares his insights.
Comments
Tillinghast has an amazing memory and he has great attention to details, even minutia. He needs that to hold 800 stocks, and rumors are that if asked questions on ANY one of them, he can answer without checking notes.
So, I found fascinating his example of how he "beat" ChatGPT on Perry Mason (that was my favorite TV show too at one time). He asked ChatGPT how many murderers on Perry Mason were women? ChatGPT said more than 1 BECAUSE nobody has a database of stuff like this to feed into ChatCPT, and that is certainly a correct answer, but not very insightful. But BY Tillinghast's count, there were at least 260 Perry Mason episodes with women murderers! He uses this example to point out that generative AI cannot do any original thinking, but only make conclusions based on the data it has been fed.