Unpopular Opinion
Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!
How voting works:
Vote the opposite of the norm.
If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.
Guidelines:
Tag your post, if possible (not required)
- If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
- If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].
Rules:
1. NO POLITICS
Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.
2. Be civil.
Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...
Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
5. No trolling.
This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.
6. Defend your opinion
This is a bit of a mix of rules 4 and 5 to help foster higher quality posts. You are expected to defend your unpopular opinion in the post body. We don't expect a whole manifesto (please, no manifestos), but you should at least provide some details as to why you hold the position you do.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
view the rest of the comments
I think you're getting confused by the marketing. The marketing makes it out to be this useful thing that will do your work for you which it cant. It doesnt have features its just an LLM. You ask question, it returns answer, its really not that much more. The productivity increase comes from people getting fast answers to their questions and quick templates for written work.
I'm finding it funny how many people disagree with the line about information retrieval. We get a ton of untrustworthy information all the time and we know there is a chance of it being wrong and we weigh the consequences vs the extra effort it will take to verify. If im about to stake my career on a fact im not going to rely on chatGPT but if I need to see some popular UI frameworks then chatGPT is fine. If its wrong thats fine there is nothing riding on it I just move on and check the next one.
It doesn’t retrieve information, it’s a txt prediction based on what “might” sound like a correct response. It makes shit up and doesn’t increase productivity. Literally has been proven countless times.
Here’s the lasted example: https://thisweekinvideogames.com/feature/concept-artists-in-games-say-generative-ai-references-only-make-their-jobs-harder/
And that’s not even touching on the environmental impact or the oligarchs pushing propaganda into these clankers or them generating porn. See Grok.
I think we have an easier job determining right away if humans are lying about something, and humans generally own up to being unsure about things. On the other hand, AI seems to be designed with an intention to be infallible, as it doesn't even give an estimate as to how sure it is that it's information is correct.
If a human in an organisation lies/says incorrect things a lot, they get fired.
So it sounds like AI is only really useful for your ~~line~~ wider area of work, that being anything programming focused, and therefore you're thinking of a very specific type of information to get fetched - templates to build off of. I hope you can see why it was bad to generalise in your initial response; someone working with historical or political facts, a structural engineer working on bridges, or a teacher, can't rely on GPT to get them the info they work with.
I think we are equally bad at determining lying between humans and AI. The people who are getting fooled by AI answers would click the top result on google and get fooled there as well so I dont see it as a massive decrease in info quality even though I can admit it is a decrease.
There are plenty of jobs where it will be more and less useful but my claim is that its generally still useful for majority of professions/people as a quick way to retrieve info via natural language querying. The results are mostly accurate and can include sources if you ask. Thats good enough for most people and most questions. Sure if you need to dig through docs or reference the exact paper then you can search google and get it yourself.
I dont think Teachers is a good example, teachers use it all the time and seem to really like it, idk what structural engineers do so i cant really comment. But even if the engineer has no use I still say its a good feature because not every feature of an operating system has to be used by 100% of people. Windows screen read is a good feature but I dont use it. The share button is a good feature even if I dont use it. Carplay is a good feature even if I dont use it etc.