[Szpadel]

I find that only acceptable (only little annoying) when this is some lead in case we're we have no idea what could be the issue, it might help to brainstorm and note that this is not verified information is important.

most annoying is when people trust chatgpt more that experts they pay. we had case when our client asked us for some specific optimization, and we told him that it makes no sense, then he asked the other company that we cooperate with and got similar response, then he asked chatgpt and it told him it's great idea. And guess what, he bought $20k subscription to implement it.

[hedora]

I do this occasionally when it's time sensitive, and I cannot find a reasonable source to read. e.g., "ChatGPT says cut the blue wire, not the red one. I found the bomb schematics it claims say this, but they're paywalled."

If that's all the available information and you're out of time, you may as well cut the blue wire. But, pretty much any other source is automatically more trustworthy.

[38]

> when this is some lead in case we're we have no idea what could be the issue

English please

[jacksnipe]

We’re was autocorrected from where

[38]

Even with that it's nonsense