I took this another direction Mike, a rebuttal if I may.
This tech doesn't belong in search engines.
GPTs are not trained to predict facts, they have a huge flaw with "hallucinations" or what some call confabulation and this makes for a pretty terrible search feature in a world of mitigating fake news/misinfo/disinfo.
I took this another direction Mike, a rebuttal if I may.
This tech doesn't belong in search engines.
GPTs are not trained to predict facts, they have a huge flaw with "hallucinations" or what some call confabulation and this makes for a pretty terrible search feature in a world of mitigating fake news/misinfo/disinfo.
I agree. But we're talking about human nature, not technology -- i.e., where will humans look when they want an answer and how good are humans at choosing the right answer from 10k search results. If ChatGPT is built into email, word processing and browsers, I'm suggesting people will push the button and get the answer, rather than switching to a search engine and coping with a long list of links to results that leave it up to the user to discern the validity of.
I took this another direction Mike, a rebuttal if I may.
This tech doesn't belong in search engines.
GPTs are not trained to predict facts, they have a huge flaw with "hallucinations" or what some call confabulation and this makes for a pretty terrible search feature in a world of mitigating fake news/misinfo/disinfo.
https://towardsdatascience.com/chatgpt-insists-i-am-dead-and-the-problem-with-language-models-db5a36c22f11
I agree. But we're talking about human nature, not technology -- i.e., where will humans look when they want an answer and how good are humans at choosing the right answer from 10k search results. If ChatGPT is built into email, word processing and browsers, I'm suggesting people will push the button and get the answer, rather than switching to a search engine and coping with a long list of links to results that leave it up to the user to discern the validity of.