People Twitter

5396 readers

197 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

Mark NSFW content.
No doxxing people.
Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
No bullying or international politcs
Be excellent to each other.
Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

SendMeYourTaTas@sh.itjust.works

pelespirit@sh.itjust.works

1066

Why is no one talking about how unproductive it is to have verify every "hallucination" ChatGPT gives you? (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 month ago by phoneymouse@lemmy.world to c/whitepeopletwitter@sh.itjust.works

115 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I don’t feel like off-the-cuff summaries by AI can replace web sites and detailed articles written by knowledgeable humans

No. But that's not what a typical search result returns.

There's also no guarantee the "detailed articles" you get back are well-informed or correct. Lots of top search results are just ad copy or similar propaganda. YouTube, in particular, is rife with long winded bullshitters.

What you're looking for is a well-edited trustworthy encyclopedia, not a search engine.

[–] Zeppo@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

Sure. It depends on the topic. It also depends how good you are at searching. Personally, I don’t have any difficulty finding quality websites via Google or DuckDuckGo. Sometimes it requires refining the search terms, and many people don’t know how to do that properly. For certain topics, I might not. However, i stand by my assertion that some statistically generated text which you can trust at all is less useful than a good article on a topic. Is Wikipedia useful also? Yes, it is.