It's not correct by accident. It's not generating responses randomly, but based on extensive training data. The accuracy of answers is very high, especially on

It's not correct by accident. It's not generating responses randomly, but based on extensive training data. The accuracy of answers is very high, especially on uncontroversial topics like most of the examples in the OP. And the author even described cross-checking the answers for validity and confirming that it was generally correct. (I was also an electrical engineer once upon a time and nothing jumped out at me as wrong, but admittedly it's been quite a while!) You can't rely in it being 100% correct, but that's very different from it having no informational value at all. When it comes down to it, you can't rely on anything being 100% correct. I recall finding multiple errors in textbooks in the past, and certainly Wikipedia is wrong about all kinds of things; that doesn't make them useless. It just means in situations where it's critical to be correct, you need to double-check. But often that's not necessary, and when it is, it's a lot easier to start with something and then verify it than to not have the tool in the first place.