|
|
|
|
|
by Toutouxc
1176 days ago
|
|
I can't say anything specific about the accuracy, other than that it's good enough, but the difference between asking GPT-4 and googling the same question is night and day. And that's comparing it to Kagi, with my own search filters with boosted wikipedia, stackoverflow and generally scientific sources. Do you know the feeling that you want to ask a specific question about a specific, technical aspect of something, and you wish you could just tell the search engine somehow that you're just not interested in hand-wavy popular science average Joe half-incorrect answers? And if you actually find the one good answer on page 14 of some god-forgotten thread from 2006, the question differs in some tiny but important detail from what you're after? Well that feeling doesn't exist with GPT-4. So far we've always been able to come up with something, together. If you don't like the first answer, you ask more questions. You can dig deeper. You can tell it what your guess is, what your intuition tells you about the problem, where exactly your uncertainty lies, e.g.: You: I don't understand phenomenon X.
GPT: Oh that's easy, X is just [parrots wikipedia].
You: That's fine, but I don't understand how X differs from Y, they sound like the same phenomena.
GPT: I see why you'd think that, but Y and X actually differ in this detail called Foo that makes all the difference.
You: I still don't get it, compare Foo to something similar that I know from normal life.
GPT: Okay, so Foo is like an elephant who's too large to drive a car.
You: Ooh, I get it now.
|
|
Or
Or IMO if I'm not sure what the output should be GPT is less than worthless it's actually convincingly misleading.