As far as I am aware, OpenAI has not publicly disclosed the architecture of ChatGPT, their open-source chatbot model. In general, chatbots like ChatGPT use a combination of natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning techniques to generate responses to user inputs.

One common technique used by chatbots to "remember" previous prompts is to use a sliding window approach, where the model maintains a fixed-size buffer of the most recent inputs and uses this information to generate its responses. This allows the model to take into account the context of previous inputs, but does not provide true recurrence or long-term memory capabilities.

Another approach that some chatbots use is to incorporate recurrence into the model architecture, such as through the use of recurrent neural networks (RNNs) or long short-term memory (LSTM) networks. These architectures are designed to allow the model to maintain a "memory" of previous inputs over longer periods of time, which can help improve the coherence and consistency of the generated responses.

It is not clear which approach, if any, OpenAI has used in the development of ChatGPT. The company has not publicly released details about the model architecture or the techniques used to implement memory in the model.

That's exactly my point. Most gun locks by themselves are woefully unsafe and inadequate, and, if you're a gun owner, the buck stops with you to keep it safe.

I grew up around guns, with my family owning over a dozen. Not once was a loaded gun ever kept in the house. Not once was ammunition stored together with the gun. Both were kept in steel safes with both a pick-resistant key AND a six-digit combo when at home, and often they were kept offsite (i.e., away from kids - me) in a small 24/7 storage locker.

It's really not that hard or expensive to do gun ownership right - these parents have no excuse.

> When I was that age I routinely broke into my dad's workshop that he had locked up to keep me away from his power tools. I had enough time that I would try every combination over a few weeks until I got the code to work.

Which is one reason why a combination lock (especially the three-number ones that are common on gun safes) are woefully inadequate for gun safety. Part of the responsibility is on marketing and inadequate regulation around gun locks, but most of the blame is on the consumers of said locks (the parents), who should either a) know better or b) not own a gun.

> It is absolutely possible that the parents took reasonable steps to safeguard their gun from their kid and that the kid defeated all of those efforts to gain access secretly anyway.

Disagree. The fact that a 7 year old was able to break in is an existence proof that whatever gun safe they had was criminally indadequate. A 7 year old isn't using an angle grinder or thermite - this is basic, basic safety.

If the parents want to own a gun, fine - but when they chose to do so, they implicitly accepted criminal responsibility for securing that gun and any consequences for failing to do so. If they don't want that liability, or they're unable to manage that liability (as is clearly the case), they shouldn't own a gun - period.