undefined

points

[-]

This begs the question. You are assuming they wanted an LLM generated response, but were to lazy to generate one. Isn't it more likely that the reason they didn't use an LLM is that they didn't want an LLM response, so giving them one is...sort of clueless?

If you asked someone how to make French fries and they replied with a map-pin-drop on the nearest McDonald's, would you feel satisfied with the answer?

by charcircuit5 days ago|

parent|

[-]

It's more like someone asks if there are McDonald's in San Francisco, and then someone else searches "mcdonald's san francisco" on Google Maps and then replies with the result. It would have been faster for the person to just type their question elsewhere and get the result back immediately instead of someone else doing it for them.

by MarkusQ5 days ago|

parent|

[-]

Right. If someone asks "What does ChatGPT think about ...", I'd fully agree that they're being lazy. But if that's _not_ what they ask, we shouldn't assume that that's what they meant.

We should at least consider that maybe they asked how to make French fries because they actually want to learn how to make them themselves. I'll admit the XY problem is real, and people sometimes fail to ask for what they actually want, but we should, as a rule, give them the benefit of the doubt instead of just assuming that we're smarter than them.

by charcircuit5 days ago|

parent|

[-]

Such open ended questions are not the kind of questions I'm referring to.

by allenu5 days ago|

prev|

[-]

I think a lot of times, people are here just to have a conversation. I wouldn't go so far as to say someone who is pontificating and could have done a web search to verify their thoughts and opinions is being lazy.

This might be a case of just different standards for communication here. One person might want the absolute facts and assumes everyone posting should do their due diligence to verify everything they say, but others are okay with just shooting the shit (to varying degrees).

by charcircuit5 days ago|

parent|

[-]

I've seen this happen too. People will comment and say in the comment that they can't remember something when they could have easily refound that information with chatgpt or google.

by officeplant5 days ago|

prev|

[-]

> If they just instead opened up chatgpt they could have instantly gotten their answer.

Great now we've wasted time & material resources for a possibly wrong and hallucinated answer. What part of this is beneficial to anyone?

by Kim_Bruning5 days ago|

parent|

[-]

Counterpoint:

Frankly, it's a skill thing.

You know how some people can hardly find the back of their own hands if they googled them?

And then there's people (like eg. experienced wikipedians doing research) who have google-fu and can find accurate information about the weirdest things in the amount of time it takes you to tie your shoes and get your hat on.

Now watch how someone like THAT uses chatgpt (or some better LLM) . It's very different from just prompting with a question. Often it involves delegating search tasks to the LLM (and opening 5 google tabs alongside besides) . And they get really interesting results!

by droopyEyelids5 days ago|

prev|

[-]

Well put. There are two sides of the coin: the lazy questioner who expects others to do the work researching what they would not, and the lazy/indulgent answerer who basically LMGTFY's it.

Ideally we would require people who ask questions to say what they've researched so far, and where they got stuck. Then low-effort LLM or search engine result pages wouldn't be such a reasonable answer.

by WorldPeas5 days ago|

parent|

[-]

I haven't thought about LMGTFY since stackoverflow. Usually though I see responses with people thrusting forth AI answers that provide more reasoning, back then LMGTFY was more about rote conventions(e.g. "how do you split a string on ," and ai is used more for "what are ways that solar power will change grid dynamics")