4 ms·

It's really good at conveying information and summarizing the most prominent points of view on a topic. If your goal is just to get a quick, fact-based overview

It's really good at conveying information and summarizing the most prominent points of view on a topic. If your goal is just to get a quick, fact-based overview without any color or fluff, I think it already tops what the vast majority of humans can do. I'm finding myself reaching for it instead of Google or Wikipedia for a lot of random questions, which is pretty damn impressive. It's not good at everything, but I'm rather blown away by how strong it is in the 'short informative essay' niche.

markab21 4y ago
I used it as a consultant on a development project to help me organize some of the milestones and design goals in some documentation. It wasn't that I didn't know the stuff, I do, but more helpful with quickly organizing and presenting information in a clean and well-written way. I did have to go through and re-write parts of it specific to our domain.. but it saved me many hours of work doing tedious organization of data. I also tested it with helping create some SOP's for a new position in our very small company, even breaking down the expected tasks into daily schedules. It's not that it's perfect, but it generates a bit of a boiler-plate starting point for me which then I can work with from there.
simmschi 4y ago
This. I keep going back to Chat-GPT instead of Google or Wikipedia for exactly the same reasons. It allows you to explore topics that are well understood, in a way that fits your own understanding and pace. It's like somebody writing a great mini-tutorial on topics you're interested in, in a pace and abstraction that suits you. Examples for me are concepts of mathematics or computer science that I would like to freshen up on. Things you could also ask a colleague over lunch, or find eventually via searching Google/Youtube/Wikipedia etc. Just much faster and more convenient.
- psychphysic 4y ago
  I've found it way too easy to confuse. Often I have a specific question like how does X relate to Y. And usually the answer given is total nonsense.
eliasdaler 4y ago
"quick, fact-based overview" I'd argue with "fact-based". It frequently makes up facts (and even sources!) as it generates text. Also you should consider the possibility that "the facts" it generates can easily be a part of a tabloid article or a post on some "Moon landing was fake / flat earth" blog.

markab21 4y ago

I used it as a consultant on a development project to help me organize some of the milestones and design goals in some documentation. It wasn't that I didn't know the stuff, I do, but more helpful with quickly organizing and presenting information in a clean and well-written way. I did have to go through and re-write parts of it specific to our domain.. but it saved me many hours of work doing tedious organization of data. I also tested it with helping create some SOP's for a new position in our very small company, even breaking down the expected tasks into daily schedules. It's not that it's perfect, but it generates a bit of a boiler-plate starting point for me which then I can work with from there.

simmschi 4y ago

This. I keep going back to Chat-GPT instead of Google or Wikipedia for exactly the same reasons. It allows you to explore topics that are well understood, in a way that fits your own understanding and pace. It's like somebody writing a great mini-tutorial on topics you're interested in, in a pace and abstraction that suits you. Examples for me are concepts of mathematics or computer science that I would like to freshen up on. Things you could also ask a colleague over lunch, or find eventually via searching Google/Youtube/Wikipedia etc. Just much faster and more convenient.

psychphysic 4y ago
I've found it way too easy to confuse. Often I have a specific question like how does X relate to Y. And usually the answer given is total nonsense.

eliasdaler 4y ago

"quick, fact-based overview" I'd argue with "fact-based". It frequently makes up facts (and even sources!) as it generates text. Also you should consider the possibility that "the facts" it generates can easily be a part of a tabloid article or a post on some "Moon landing was fake / flat earth" blog.