|
|
|
|
|
|
by denlekke
947 days ago
|
|
|
i appreciate your confidence and would love to know how far you would go with the guarantee ! it makes me realize that there is at least one avenue for some level of trust about gpt accuracy and that's my general awareness of how much written content on the topic it probably had access to during training. i think maybe your earlier comment was about the average trustworthiness of all podcasts vs the same for all gpt responses. i would probably side with gpt4 in that context. however, there are plenty of situations where the comparison is between a podcast from the best human in the world at something and gpt which might have less training data or maybe the risks for the topic aren't eating an uncooked turkey but learning cpr wrong or having an airbag not deploy |
|
|
No one person is particularly worth listening to individually, and as a podcast??? Good lord no.
LLMs beat podcasts when it comes to, “random exploration of an unfamiliar topic”, every single time.
The real issue here is that you trust podcasts so completely, by the way, not that ChatGPT is some oracle of knowledge. More generally, a skill all people need to develop is the ability to explore an idea without accepting whatever you first find. If you’re spending an afternoon talking with ChatGPT about a topic, you should be able to A) use your existing knowledge to give a rough first-pass validation of the information you’re getting, which will catch most hallucinations out of the gate, as they’re rarely subtle, and B) take what you learn with a hefty grain of salt, as if you’re hearing it from a stranger in a bar.
This is an important skill, and absolutely applies to both podcasts and LLMs. Honestly why such profound deference to podcasts in particular?