[liendolucas]

Yeah, and when I was in high school everyone used to refer to Encarta.

> I know in our university pretty much everyone that attends exams uses chatgpt to study.

And they shouldn't be doing that. They are wrong. Students should be reading suggested bibliography and spending long hours with an open book in a table instead of being lazy and abuse a tech that is yet in its infancy when learning concepts. Studying with a chatbot. Complete madness.

[danielbln]

You sound like our teachers back in the day, warning us to not use Wikipedia because "everyone can write stuff there!!". The kids will be fine.

[taurknaut]

Wikipedia furnishes sources, which is what you actually use.

[xigoi]

The information on Wikipedia is mostly correct except for controversial topics.

[master-lincoln]

I don't know why you are being downvoted. Learning from something that regularly hallucinates info doesn't seem right. I think AI is a good starting point to learn about what terms to research on your own though.

[danielbln]

OP is downvoted because of "students should be at a table with a book and that's it", like it's the 50s. LLMs can be wonderful study aids but do have plenty of issues with hallucination, and they should therefore only be part of a holistic research mix, alongside search engines, encyclopedias, articles and yes, books. Turning Amish is probably not the right way to go though.

[liendolucas]

If you want reputable sources of information, books are unparalleled like it or not, it's a fact.

> "students should be at a table with a book and that's it"

That's not what I meant (or yes if you take what you read literally):

What I meant was whole process that your brain goes through when you read, synthesize information, take notes, do an exercise, check answers, compare different explanations/definitions from different authors, etc. makes at least from my point of view a rich way to study a topic.

I'm not saying that technology can't help you out. When you watch for example a 3brown1blue video you are definitely putting good use of technology to aid you to understand or literally "view" a concept. That's ok and actually in many cases can be revealing. You can't get that from a book! But on the other side a book also forces you to do the hard work of thinking and maybe come up with such visualizations and ideas by your own.

Happy to be pointed as an "Amish" when it comes to studying/learning things ;) but I hope that I convinced you that what I explained has nothing of Amish but that you don't need a source of power to read a book.