[ToucanLoucan]

> However, do keep in mind that even authoritative sources found during your own research may be inaccurate. And for some questions, which answer is "right" or "wrong" may not be black and white.

I mean, sure. But again: that's just my point restated. What is this doing that a standard search engine does not?

Like, I put shit in my phone's calendar and set reminders so that I don't to think about it anymore. That is a cognitive load (remembering my dentist appointment) that I have now offloaded to technology. And that's useful as all hell, which is why my phone's calendar is full to the tits of everything one would put in a calendar. Now I don't need to think about it. I get messages from my phone when events are coming up, and I get a literal calendar on my screen when I want it, showing me all these things with perfect accuracy.

What is BingGPT in this scenario offloading? It's just a search engine but slower. It doesn't understand what good software is, so it can't make value based judgements on which to recommend. It doesn't know what reliable sources are, and can't evaluate for them, so every bit of information you get back must be treated with a grain of salt. It (probably) doesn't even remotely conceive of why you are asking it a thing or what a good answer to that query would look like because it doesn't know you, it just knows a massive, incomprehensible amount of averages about a ton of things that might be what you want.

And like, that's fine, search engines have had these limitations for my entire life. That's why I'm saying, I don't understand why this is better. It's the same thing as Bing, but slower, and in a chat box.

[radlad]

> I mean, sure. But again: that's just my point restated. What is this doing that a standard search engine does not?

And again, it is quicker than clicking multiple links and can generalize / contextualize what it finds, mapping it to the answer you're looking for.

Have you tried asking one of these tools to write some simple scripts for you? It works decently, actually.

If you didn't already know how to program, this could save you a TON of time, even if it doesn't work perfectly on the first try.

[TeMPOraL]

> If you didn't already know how to program, this could save you a TON of time, even if it doesn't work perfectly on the first try.

Nice thing is, if it doesn't work perfectly on the first try, you can describe the problem (or paste the whole output, errors included), and get back a fixed version that's likely to work this time around.