3 ms·

I think my main response to these messages is: “If ChatGPT is more trustworthy than me, the expert you hired, what do you have me for?” I can spend hours refut

by Aeolun 1y ago

I think my main response to these messages is: “If ChatGPT is more trustworthy than me, the expert you hired, what do you have me for?” I can spend hours refuting and explaining why what ChatGPT told you doesn’t apply in our situation, or you can… just trust me?

paulcole 1y ago
The people who get the most haughty about insisting that they be “just trusted” tend to be the people who are the least trustworthy.
- Aeolun 1y ago
  I don’t think I’m haughty when I don’t want to try and convey 20 years of experience in a few sentences every time some quotes chatgpt?
  - paulcole 1y ago
    You don't think ChatGPT is ever correct enough to just go with it? You really want to prove your experience every single time?
    - drewbug01 1y ago
      If someone is taking the time to refute ChatGPT’s output and telling you why the answer isn’t applicable in a given situation, it certainly implies that ChatGPT wasn’t “correct enough” at all. What situations do you think it’s fine to be “correct enough?”
      - paulcole 1y ago
        But this person says they want to refute it in every situation. Some people seem to make a hobby of refuting the output of others. So no, I don’t trust the implication that if somebody spends time refuting it that it must be worth refuting. In my experience (with both people-output and ChatGPT-output) my goal is to not refute anything unless it absolutely positively must be refuted. If it’s a low-stakes situation where another person has an idea that seems like it might/will probably work, let them go nuts and give it a shot. I’ll offer quick feedback or guiding questions but I have 0 interest in refuting it even if I think there’s a chance it’ll go wrong. They can learn by doing.
        Aeolun 1y ago
        > But this person says they want to refute it in every situation. No. You read that I want to refute its output in every situation. Obviously I don’t have to do that if ChatGPT is correct, but people don’t generally quote ChatGPT at you if it’s just confirmed what you already said.
        paulcole 1y ago
        Yes. I read that because that’s what you said: > I don’t think I’m haughty when I don’t want to try and convey 20 years of experience in a few sentences every time some quotes chatgpt? Could you explain how “every time some[one] quotes chatgpt” should be read as “not every time some[one] quotes chatgpt”?

by Aeolun 1y ago

paulcole 1y ago

The people who get the most haughty about insisting that they be “just trusted” tend to be the people who are the least trustworthy.

Aeolun 1y ago
I don’t think I’m haughty when I don’t want to try and convey 20 years of experience in a few sentences every time some quotes chatgpt?
- paulcole 1y ago
  You don't think ChatGPT is ever correct enough to just go with it? You really want to prove your experience every single time?
  - drewbug01 1y ago
    If someone is taking the time to refute ChatGPT’s output and telling you why the answer isn’t applicable in a given situation, it certainly implies that ChatGPT wasn’t “correct enough” at all. What situations do you think it’s fine to be “correct enough?”
    - paulcole 1y ago
      But this person says they want to refute it in every situation. Some people seem to make a hobby of refuting the output of others. So no, I don’t trust the implication that if somebody spends time refuting it that it must be worth refuting. In my experience (with both people-output and ChatGPT-output) my goal is to not refute anything unless it absolutely positively must be refuted. If it’s a low-stakes situation where another person has an idea that seems like it might/will probably work, let them go nuts and give it a shot. I’ll offer quick feedback or guiding questions but I have 0 interest in refuting it even if I think there’s a chance it’ll go wrong. They can learn by doing.
      - Aeolun 1y ago
        > But this person says they want to refute it in every situation. No. You read that I want to refute its output in every situation. Obviously I don’t have to do that if ChatGPT is correct, but people don’t generally quote ChatGPT at you if it’s just confirmed what you already said.
        paulcole 1y ago
        Yes. I read that because that’s what you said: > I don’t think I’m haughty when I don’t want to try and convey 20 years of experience in a few sentences every time some quotes chatgpt? Could you explain how “every time some[one] quotes chatgpt” should be read as “not every time some[one] quotes chatgpt”?