ChatGPT is at best impressive as a search engine where you can't tell how reliable the source is.
ChatGPT is at best impressive as a search engine where you can't tell how reliable the source is. 26 comments
@Gargron I mean if you're using it as a source of truth it's obviously really bad, but it's a text generator. It's an extremely impressive text generator. An unreliable search engine is as good as it gets, I guess, if it's "a potential absolute limit on the whole practice of language modeling." https://www.zdnet.com/article/openais-gigantic-gpt-3-hints-at-the-limits-of-language-models-for-ai/ @Gargron I tend to disagree. No search engine I'm aware of comes up with a Monty Python Sketch about Mastodon and Twitter: @Gargron I think you might be missing the point of it, it's not supposed to be search engine. @Gargron more than that for me. It helped me (and saved many many many hours) by creating initial unit tests and documentation for my code. @Gargron if you write code, you probably look for answers on stack overflow. When you find something that looks fine, you try it. The same applies for #chatgpt, but it takes a few seconds to have an answer instead of digging. Moreover, if you post a question on SO, you will probably be answered badly, verbally assaulted; it just does not happen with chatgpt. |
@Gargron I'm interested in it as a code generator. "Write unit tests for this function." "Generate BUILD files for this code."