[jeswin]

Google (even now) wasn't absolutely accurate either. That didn't stop it from becoming many billions worth.

> You can have it craft an email, or to review your email, but I wouldn't trust an LLM with anything mission-critical

My point is that an entire world lies between these two extremes.

[ppeetteerr]

Google became a billion dollar company creating the best search and indexing service at the time and putting ads around the results (that and YouTube). The didn't own the answer of the question.

[DiscourseFan]

I would say that anything you write can come back to you in the future, so don’t blindly sign your name on anything you didn’t review yourself.

[netdevnet]

Why don't you give actual concrete testable examples back with evidence where this is the case? Put your skin in the game.

[jacobr1]

A support ticket is a good middle ground. This is probably the area of most robust enterprise deployment. Synthesizing knowledge to produce a draft reply with some logic either to automatically send it or have human review. There are both shitty and ok systems that save real money with case deflection and even improved satisfaction rates. Partly this works because human responses can also suck, so you are raising a low bar. But it is a real use case with real money and reputation on the line.

[ppeetteerr]

Keyword is "draft". You still need a person to review the response with knowledge of the context of the issue. It's the same as my email example.