• jsomae@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    2 months ago

    ChatGPT is a tool. Use it for tasks where the cost of verifying the output is correct is less than the cost of doing it by hand.

    • qarbone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 months ago

      Honestly, I’ve found it best for quickly reformatting text and other content. It should live and die as a clerical tool.

      • ArchRecord@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Which is exactly why every time I see big tech companies making another stupid implementation of it, it pisses me off.

        LLMs like ChatGPT are fundamentally word probability machines. They predict the probability of words based on context (or if not given context, just the general probability) when given notes, for instance, they have all the context and knowledge, and all they have to do it predict the most statistically probable way of formatting the existing data into a better structure. Literally the perfect use case for the technology.

        Even in similar contexts that don’t immediately seem like “text reformatting,” it’s extremely handy. For instance, Linkwarden can auto-tag your bookmarks, based on a predetermined list you set, using the context of each page fed into a model running via Ollama. Great feature, very useful.

        Yet somehow, every tech company manages to use it in every way except that when developing products with it. It’s so discouraging to see.

    • tacobellhop@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Youre still doing it by hand to verify in any scientific capacity. I only use ChatGPT for philosophical hypotheticals involving the far future. We’re both wrong but it’s fun for the back and forth.

      • jsomae@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        It is not true in general that verifying output for a science-related prompt requires doing it by hand, where “doing it by hand” means putting in the effort to answer the prompt manually without using AI.