4 ms·
First, you not having to spend the 60 seconds and it means you can parallelize it with something else to get the answer effectively instantly. Second, you're es
by wilg 1y ago
First, you not having to spend the 60 seconds and it means you can parallelize it with something else to get the answer effectively instantly. Second, you're essentially establishing that if an LLM can get it done in less than 60 seconds its better than your manual approach, which is a huge win, as this will get faster!
- sigmoid10 1y agoFor real. This is what it must have been like living in the early 20th century and hearing people say they prefer a horse to get groceries because it is so much more effort to crank-start a car. I look forward to the age when we gleefully reminisce about the time we had to deal with SEO spam manually.
- lomase 1y agoI look forward to the day AI hype is dead as blockchain.
- prmoustache 1y agoThe thing is, the idea of cars cars being a plus for humanity is still debatable to this day. We won a lot in some areas but lost an awful lot in others.
- sigmoid10 1y agoThat's a ridiculously cynical claim. And even if it were true, it still misses the fact that horses and the entire economy built around them stood no chance in the end. Today we are again in the sitation where many people who are alive and working today will have to consider getting reeducated if they don't want to be left behind, whether they want it or not.
- lambda 1y agoThere's no useful parallelization that could happen during this particular search. This took a couple of iterations of research via ChatGPT, and then reading the results and looking at the referenced sources; the total interaction time with ChatGPT is a similar 60 seconds or so, the main difference is the 3 minutes of waiting for it to generate answers vs. the maybe a couple of seconds for the searches.
- wilg 1y agoWhat? You can do anything else you want during the search?