While ChatGPT has obvious limits and flaws, the conclusion that it is a robotic tour without any unexpected detours seems unfair. It is also something I barely

While ChatGPT has obvious limits and flaws, the conclusion that it is a robotic tour without any unexpected detours seems unfair. It is also something I barely ever came across in traditional itineraries by humans on the various websites I used for our most recent London trip. No, it was basically (just like here) popularity rankings tuned for good SEO rankings. Even personal blogs barely ever surprised me where exciting detours were spots such as the tourist infested “unknown” Neal’s Yard. I got so many Needles, so many Sky Gardens. Discovering the ticket-free option The Garden at 120 took much more prodding. The flaws and lies from GPT 3.5 are common, but our unfair bias against AI equally so. We often seem to place these services on a higher pedestal than ourselves. Oh and please don’t use budget models for articles in high-profile newspapers and draw conclusions on AI from those. Also, remember they follow your commands; if you want lesser known and unexpected spots, be sure to say so!