[danielbln]

> I don't go anywhere _near_ search engines for this, I'd find it somewhere between disrespectful and unethical. They're paying for _my_ expertise.

I bet someone said this 30 years ago. As it stands today, LLMs can't wholesale do the job for you, they merely augment it. And they are finicky and fallible, so expertise is needed to actually produce useful results and validate them. There are many reasons why an LLM isn't the right tool for a certain task, wanting to drive on some sort of moral ethical high road however is imo _not_ a great reason.

Continue on that road and people who have no qualms about using whatever tool at their disposal will eat your lunch. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but eventually.

[fhd2]

The value of advice is largely estimated based on who gives it. If a client is hiring me, it seems clear to me that they're paying for mine.

For support tasks (like research or even supporting a writeup) I'm not ethically opposed to using LLMs. It's just that I try every couple of months and conclude it's not a net improvement. Your mileage may vary of course.

[penjelly]

augmenting your advice with chatgpt shouldnt be difficult. You could simply bounce your ideas off chatgpt before meeting a client, that way your work has already been crosschecked, its not like it would be providing advice (your product) for you.