AIs are definitely not “good enough” to give correct answers to science questions. I’ve seen lots of other incorrect answers before seeing this one. While it was easy to spot that this answer is incorrect, how many incorrect answers are not obvious?
Comment on [deleted]
FaceDeer@fedia.io 2 months agoExcept it is capable of meaningfully doing so, just not in 100% of every conceivable situation. And those rare flubs are the ones that get spread around and laughed at, such as this example.
There's a nice phrase I commonly use, "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good." These AIs are good enough at this point that I find them to be very useful. Not perfect, of course, but they don't have to be as long as you're prepared for those occasions, like this one, where they give a wrong result. Like any tool you have some responsibility to know how to use it and what its capabilities are.
btaf45@lemmy.world 2 months ago
conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
No, it isn’t.
You’re allowing a simple tool with literally zero reading comprehension to do your reading for you. It’s not surprising your understanding of what the tech is is lacking.