|
|
|
|
|
|
by jraph
756 days ago
|
|
|
When evidence is needed, "often correct enough" is not sufficient. You need reliable and correct for sure. I assume you understand how LLMs work? Probabilistic word generation? That can't possibly be used as a source. It literally works by making up things that look probable. It can be used to find a source, but you still need a source. The LLM might be correct often enough, but you'll only know the LLM is correct in the case at hand by checking at a source… > If ChatGPT behaves like a roulette to you I'll attribute that to operator error. I never used it. I know LLMs can be impressive and useful, but sourcing is not among the use cases. The operator should be operating the right tool for the job in the first place. Shit I say is hopefully correct often enough, but I still can't use myself as a source. |
|
|
That's a big "when". Often it is not. Real life is often more maleable.
For similar reasons I don't need aeronautical engineering to fix my kids bike. Good enough is good enough.
> I never used it.
You should try. If at least to have a more educated opinion on the matter.