That's clearly not the AI's fault. The text would contain and elaborate on this when fed bullet points, which it clearly wasn't. Plus, this is the kind of articles I'd imagine no one really wants...
It’s devoid of any specifics, such as named players or descriptions of any plays, particularly important scoring plays
That's clearly not the AI's fault. The text would contain and elaborate on this when fed bullet points, which it clearly wasn't. Plus, this is the kind of articles I'd imagine no one really wants to write in the first place.
These will definitely come back in numbers the moment some intern gets prompt "engineering" training.
They hit the nail on the head with the closing line: My wife uses ChatGPT to rewrite stuff for her or generate small stuff but she reviews everything it does and rewrites as necessary. Her being...
They hit the nail on the head with the closing line:
That seems to be the misunderstanding here. AI is a tool for journalists to use, not one that can do the job of journalism.
My wife uses ChatGPT to rewrite stuff for her or generate small stuff but she reviews everything it does and rewrites as necessary. Her being competent without the tool is absolutely critical for the tool to be useful.
I use GPT-4 for programming constantly. For some tasks any idiot can get them done with the help of the AI. But for most things you need to know the right leading questions to ask. It generally...
I use GPT-4 for programming constantly. For some tasks any idiot can get them done with the help of the AI. But for most things you need to know the right leading questions to ask. It generally does not understand the systems programmers are working with on a deep level, so if you ask it "How do I do X with my Y?" it will often just BS an answer. If you don't know any better you'll get lead in circles by the AI. But if you have a strong hunch about the "X" in the question you might just strike gold and it'll walk you through something that would be more work to learn through documentation and reading code.
That's clearly not the AI's fault. The text would contain and elaborate on this when fed bullet points, which it clearly wasn't. Plus, this is the kind of articles I'd imagine no one really wants to write in the first place.
These will definitely come back in numbers the moment some intern gets prompt "engineering" training.
They hit the nail on the head with the closing line:
My wife uses ChatGPT to rewrite stuff for her or generate small stuff but she reviews everything it does and rewrites as necessary. Her being competent without the tool is absolutely critical for the tool to be useful.
I use GPT-4 for programming constantly. For some tasks any idiot can get them done with the help of the AI. But for most things you need to know the right leading questions to ask. It generally does not understand the systems programmers are working with on a deep level, so if you ask it "How do I do X with my Y?" it will often just BS an answer. If you don't know any better you'll get lead in circles by the AI. But if you have a strong hunch about the "X" in the question you might just strike gold and it'll walk you through something that would be more work to learn through documentation and reading code.