|
|
|
|
|
|
by dmitrybrant
1189 days ago
|
|
|
I haven't formed a definite opinion on this, and I think I largely agree, but what about a counterargument like this one: Virtually no one does long division manually anymore, or really any basic arithmetic greater than two digits, because we invented pocket calculators and smartphones that do this for us. And are we any worse mathematicians or engineers because of this? If anything, this has freed us to perform more higher-order reasoning. And so with these kinds of "AI" assistants, is it possible that the types of reasoning that we offload onto them will free us to reason in even higher orders? |
|
|
ChatGPT tends to be extremely incoherent and often provides answers which directly disagree with what it previously said (at least on some topics*). My fear is that while you right in theory we'll have spend huge amounts of brain power and time to discern whether what it's saying is total BS or not. And I really don't know how could I even do that if I wasn't particularly knowledgeable on the topic.
If it could provide citations or some context on why did it decide to answer in the way it did it might be not so bad.
Fairly straightforward areas like software engineering are not that bad I guess.. but it's answers any even mildly complex questions on history, anthropology or related fields where there are often no clear and straightforward answer just seem absolutely awful. Just tweaking the input a bit without actually changing the core of the question can results in something that completely contradicts to what it just said before.