This market will assess whether or not I personally will be using or easily able to use a JavaScript interpretor on ChatGPT at certain dates. It does not need to be an official feature as long as it works close to as well as the existing Python interpretor and doesn't require me to pay more.
Date of Check: The verification date will fall within the second half of October 2023, specifically between October 15th and October 31st. The exact date will be based on my availability and may not be announced in advance. Participants should be aware that the check could occur on any day during this window. This is really just a way for this market to be flexible to my schedule and not require me to have access to a computer on a specific day. I'd aim to check as soon as eligible, so feel free to ping me.
Verification: I must be able to upload a file with a small function, run that file in the interpreter with given parameters, and be supplied with a downloadable link to a text file of the output of that function. In that case, it will resolve YES. If not, it will resolve NO.
I won't keep the market open after a first failed check. It's one and done.
While the solution may be hacky or require some setup, I should be on an official OpenAI url and not require me to pay for each call with an API key.
The level of hackiness is fairly subjective and relative to how polished and successful I expect the final outcome to be. For example, I am willing to upload a node tarball to explore this. I am not sure yet if I would be willing to do it every time I want to do some JavaScript interpretor work.
I am currently subscribed to ChatGPT Plus and have no intention of unsubscribing. However, it is possible for this to resolve NO in the event that OpenAI increases prices such that I no longer want to pay and accordingly don't have access to the feature. I will say that my willingness to pay for this feature (contingent on its utility) is higher than the $20 I'm paying.
EDIT: @HenkPoley introduced some exciting hacks that may cause my usage to diverge from the official OpenAI offerings. I closed the market and added some clarifications.
EDIT2: With some difficulty, I was able to successfuly execute the conditions described above-- uploading a .js file and getting the interpretor to run it. Difficulty is the operative word here. I will continue playing with this and I expect will have a good sense of how routine this JavaScript interpretor work can be well before market close.
UPDATE: After playing around, I don't think uploading a node tarball file every session is an easy experience. If I checked in in October looking for a JavaScript interpretor and things were in their current state, this would resolve NO. I will say that I have had decent success having ChatGPT iterate with the Python interpretor and then converting to JS. Very cool!
🏅 Top traders
# | Name | Total profit |
---|---|---|
1 | Ṁ56 | |
2 | Ṁ13 | |
3 | Ṁ12 |
People are also trading
@HenkPoley Sorry, thanks for clarifying. I forgot I have GPT-4(+), so I'm referring to a Javascript interpreter feature like the existing Python beta feature. I will update the title. Does that clarify things?
@Charlie You probably have GPT-4. The "(+)" is just my addition to indicate whatever they might add in the near future. You might want to call it "ChatGPT Plus", just as OpenAI calls it. (I see you already do.)
@HenkPoley Yes I'm paying for Plus and commit to paying for it at it's current price at least until the end of the year.
@Charlie You can already download NodeJS for Linux from their website, and upload it to code Interpreter. But it really needs some encouragement to actually try it 😆🫣 https://chat.openai.com/share/f69b3afe-e32f-49ee-b873-366ddadb218e
@HenkPoley Oh dang.. Let me see this. The heart of this market was about whether I would be making use of the interpreter for JavaScript, rather than it's general availability on Plus. I didn't expect potential workarounds! I've temporarily closed the market so I can tune the description to fit that. (This seems ok since only @burkebot has bet and I think any changes I make would be making it more likely to resolve YES.) Thank you for the info! Let me look into this and circle back!
@Charlie I even got to write and execute something more complex: https://chat.openai.com/share/f69b3afe-e32f-49ee-b873-366ddadb218e
@Charlie Even did a simple Dijkstra algorithm: https://chat.openai.com/share/f69b3afe-e32f-49ee-b873-366ddadb218e