> That goes for pretty much any resource; there's a lot of botched or sub-optimal explanations of complex things out on the internet. But being able to have a conversation with someone who has a decent conceptual grasp on something is better than a perfect encyclopedic article alone, and ChatGPT is able to roughly do that for a lot of subjects.
people keep saying this, but it isn't true. if you ignore sites like this one and reddit there are plenty of authoritative articles and explanations about things with provenance. and if they are wrong they'll update their information.
Clearly you are of the opinion that ChatGPT is useless, there are superior resources already available for any topic, and it's all just hype.
Well, then we don't need to argue this since the problem will elegantly solve itself if that's true.
I disagree though. For a lot of things it feels like I can get much better answers than Google, especially when it comes to somewhat conceptual questions.
(Also, I don't use news aggregator comments to learn things unless it's the only possible source. But if you think every blog post or YouTube video that got things wrong has a detailed errata, you'd be sorely wrong. It's so uncommon on YouTube that the practice is usually commended when noticed.)
> Clearly you are of the opinion that ChatGPT is useless, there are superior resources already available for any topic, and it's all just hype.
Well, then we don't need to argue this since the problem will elegantly solve itself if that's true.
I disagree though. For a lot of things it feels like I can get much better answers than Google, especially when it comes to somewhat conceptual questions.
(Also, I don't use news aggregator comments to learn things unless it's the only possible source. But if you think every blog post or YouTube video that got things wrong has a detailed errata, you'd be sorely wrong. It's so uncommon on YouTube that the practice is usually commended when noticed.)
---
I never said ChatGPT is useless, lol. it's truly amazing how people can be so bad at reading comprehension yet praise AI bots in the same post.
Ironically, the direct quote you just copied and pasted actually shows that I never claimed you explicitly said that at all. So much for reading comprehension :P
But in all seriousness, I just simply didn't have much to go off of, and extrapolated based on context in the thread. You could always elaborate on what your opinions are.
people keep saying this, but it isn't true. if you ignore sites like this one and reddit there are plenty of authoritative articles and explanations about things with provenance. and if they are wrong they'll update their information.