4 ms·
Indeed - but you still require that "subject matter expert" ability to actually evaluate the output and figure out if it's coherent or correct. That tends to re
by g_p 4y ago
Indeed - but you still require that "subject matter expert" ability to actually evaluate the output and figure out if it's coherent or correct. That tends to require a fairly high level of techniacl knowledge (and confidence your knowledge is right).
I do wonder the extent to which GPT-type tools could become teaching/learning aids - where a student asks for 5 arguments both for and against, and then fact checks them, figures out provenance of arguments, and validates them. The understanding that a student will get from taht process will, as you said, drive you to look closer at things, and ultimately if you are critically evaluating it, you'll probably learn about the subject pretty effectively.
In the same way that it's often said the best way to learn something really well is to teach/explain it to others, I think the same could be said for carefully and accurately rebutting something and explaining why it's wrong.
- mattferderer 4y ago> In the same way that it's often said the best way to learn something really well is to teach/explain it to others, I think the same could be said for carefully and accurately rebutting something and explaining why it's wrong. Yes, exactly this. It can be hard to find this though. I'm unable to get this out of Google or social media search engines. GPT is doing the best for me so far at helping me find them. > Indeed - but you still require that "subject matter expert" ability to actually evaluate the output and figure out if it's coherent or correct. Yes, you still have to do the work but knowing what to look into & where to put the work is much more than half the battle. It's giving you an opportunity you may never have had before which I think is as big as the Internet or written books or programming.