People Twitter

5274 readers

849 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

Mark NSFW content.
No doxxing people.
Must be a tweet or similar
No bullying or international politcs
Be excellent to each other.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

SendMeYourTaTas@sh.itjust.works

pelespirit@sh.itjust.works

1050

Why is no one talking about how unproductive it is to have verify every "hallucination" ChatGPT gives you? (lemmy.world)

submitted 6 days ago by phoneymouse@lemmy.world to c/whitepeopletwitter@sh.itjust.works

115 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I don’t feel like off-the-cuff summaries by AI can replace web sites and detailed articles written by knowledgeable humans

No. But that's not what a typical search result returns.

There's also no guarantee the "detailed articles" you get back are well-informed or correct. Lots of top search results are just ad copy or similar propaganda. YouTube, in particular, is rife with long winded bullshitters.

What you're looking for is a well-edited trustworthy encyclopedia, not a search engine.

[–] Zeppo@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 days ago

Sure. It depends on the topic. It also depends how good you are at searching. Personally, I don’t have any difficulty finding quality websites via Google or DuckDuckGo. Sometimes it requires refining the search terms, and many people don’t know how to do that properly. For certain topics, I might not. However, i stand by my assertion that some statistically generated text which you can trust at all is less useful than a good article on a topic. Is Wikipedia useful also? Yes, it is.