3 ms·
> So AI makes consultants faster but worse. That was just for tasks not suited to GPT-4 (and I assume, LLMs in general). > "For a task selected to be outside
by CharlesW 3y ago
> So AI makes consultants faster but worse.
That was just for tasks not suited to GPT-4 (and I assume, LLMs in general).
> "For a task selected to be outside the frontier, however, consultants using AI were 19 percentage points less likely to produce correct solutions compared to those without AI."
For tasks suited to GPT-4, consultants produced 40% higher quality results by leveraging GPT-4.
My take on that is that people who have at least some understanding of how LLMs work will be at a significant advantage, while people who think LLMs "think" will
misuse LLMs and get predictably worse results.
- ParetoOptimal 3y ago> while people who think LLMs "think" will misuse LLMs and get predictably worse results. I've found that now that I see LLM's less as thinking and more as stochiastic parrot I get a lot less use from them because I give 3-5 turns at most versus 10 turns.
- NemoNobody 3y agoWell, maybe a balance between a stoic parrot and a "thinking machine" might be the best approach. You know, everything in moderation and what not.
- ParetoOptimal 3y agoYes, ideally. The problem for me is it used to be an addition to my energy and confidence, but when you "take the magic out of it" it doesn't help out there so much. In antirez's blog he mentioned how it made things "not worth it, worth it" and I agreed, but that happens much less often if you think an LLM helping you is a fluke.