• Rothe@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Congratulations on wasting energy and water on something you could have researched yourself by using your own brain.

      • JohnnyEnzyme@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I did try researching it, wise guy, but it’s way out of my wheelhouse, and I wound up with more questions than answers in the end. Hence, trying out GPT on the issue.

        And from my understanding, most of the “energy and water” is used on the training process, not the end-stage user queries.

        • alleycat@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Please never post slop here again, thank you. ChatGPT is a text generator, not a knowledge engine.

          • JohnnyEnzyme@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            I did not ‘post slop,’ so here’s a suggestion to get off your high horse.

            As stated above, I debated and researched to the best of my abilities, then tried to further my insight through whatever ideas GPT could come up with. And it has helped me many times upon such things in the past. And TBC-- all I did was share a link, for those curious, not directly sharing an “AI slop” itself.

            Actually, if you’d like, I could make a real effort to post more AI slop in these kinds of threads. Sound good?

            ChatGPT is a text generator, not a knowledge engine.

            If you understand the fundamentals of LLM’s, then you would know that both things are true. The extensive data-training very much does make them a form of knowledge engine.