4 ms·
I don't have a problem with your post, but the hostility I see is mostly out of a real concern that people posting LLM comments could degrade discussion. It's p
by commodoreboxer 2y ago
I don't have a problem with your post, but the hostility I see is mostly out of a real concern that people posting LLM comments could degrade discussion. It's probably also association, because a lot of people have started posting comments that just say "ChatGPT says..." and nearly the entirety of the body is just LLM output.
Honestly, a lot of people are just sick of seeing anything about LLMs and don't like seeing it at all in threads that aren't already about it.
- queuebert 2y agoExactly. It's not appropriate for this type of question. LLMs can summarize the global internet sentiment about something pretty well, but they aren't the right architecture for answering precise scientific questions, nor will they ever be. It's like asking an old, experienced physicist to guess answers to things instead of solving equations.
- ben_w 2y agoThey're already better than I'd have expected possible, so I wouldn't say "never" — but also yes I agree with you, currently I'd compare their output to an off-the-cuff answer from an experienced professional (or an undergraduate trying hard).
- turzmo 2y agoAs a physicist I can say that unless ChatGPT is asked a definitional question, or a very common question (whose solution is likely described many places on the internet anyway), it is very likely to be wrong. Personally more than 90% of the questions I've asked it have been flat-out wrong so I stopped using it entirely.