I haven't used it as much as researchers like Steve Nash or AaronN, but more than enough to know it is far from infallible, and certainly will regurgitate information it finds whether it is accurate or not. I've demonstrated that right here over the last couple days in a simple on-topic query concerning frame cracking in Ithaca Flues shotguns. A.I. also recently provided wrong information on a problem with my truck, and a Husqvarna garden tractor transmission. You can refute that, or the notion that A.I. will actually make up shit when it can't find a seemingly good answer. You can refute the fact that A.I. won't acknowledge merely fabricating false answers when it is caught doing so. But you would be wrong.
On the other hand, I read a ChatGPT generated legal letter to a City Solicitor that was very well worded, and would potentially take work from a paralegal.
We haven't even touched on the hordes of college students who have been caught using A.I. to do their assigned work and thinking, and the danger of further dumbing down independent thought. We're already seeing false A.I. generated material being used to reshape politics, and have seen for example, retarded people who can't tell if an A.I. generated photo of Trump with 6 fingers and a missing leg is real or not. An A.I. platform that eventually corrects errors like that isn't necessarily a better thing. I've spent years working in and profiting from Automation, and am hardly a Luddite.
Please share where anyone said any of the things your ranting about.
See if you can keep your reply under 1,000 words, Larry, and avoid insults, name calling and invective.
