2 ms·
This is exactly what I don't understand about it. I copied your question directly from your comment into google and the top-ten results were all sufficient to a
by schwartzworld 3y ago
This is exactly what I don't understand about it. I copied your question directly from your comment into google and the top-ten results were all sufficient to answer the question. The nature of common tasks is that the answers are also common, so where's the value in paying for a service that regurgitates them to you?
- mgkimsal 3y agoSomewhat agreed on chatgpt specifically. Having in-IDE tooling that can take context and provide info, corrected for context, is more useful than having to jump to a browser, then copy paste. It's usually not much of an effort itself, but it does help minimize drift and helps keep focus. Every time I jump to a search engine to search, or SO, I'm bombarded with loads of info to filter out, then more to judge for relevancy. Tools that help reduce that filtering burden, and more context-aware relevancy, help.
- proamdev123 3y agoTime, specificity, and interaction. 1. Time — for me to search Google and then read anywhere from 1-10 links to get an answer typically takes anywhere from 5 - 30 minutes. The average is probably 10-15 minutes. But using ChatGPT takes less than 1 minute. 2. Specificity — ChatGPT gives me answers to more specific questions, with no fluff text to read through, no ads, no redirects, no links that appear to answer my specific question but actually don’t when I click on them and read them. I get a specific answer to a specific question. 3. Interaction — If I have follow-up questions and/or need clarification or alternative options/solutions I can simply ask ChatGPT and it answers. I often find that getting answers to followup questions via web search takes even longer than the original search. These all make it worth it for me. And that still doesn’t touch on all the other use cases that search engines don’t do at all.