with the sources used in its formation, very beneficial in synthesizing issues with multiple aspects/facets for faster, more comprehensive communication. It's honest and verifiable. I'd like to hear others' opinions...including Mark's...
I'd also suggest including the Question used to elicit the AI response, which I often...but not always...do.
I'm not interested in AI opinions. I'm only interested in human opinions _of members of this forum_ .
AI has its place...just not in a forum for human interaction.
If a poster doesn't care enough to parse an AI summary into a representation of their own opinion, then I don't care enough to read their post.
Frankly, it is the same thing with conor's paywall posts without any personal commentary from him. I ignore them, because he doesn't care enough to offer his own opinion, so why should I care?
Occassionally doing this can be ok. But, repeatedly using these techniques causes me to totally disregard such posts.
This is a discussion board for humans, not a place to copy/paste ChatGPT conversations.
do a little heavy lifting of their own when discussing or disputing any of your information. They rely on the one complaint for popularity here. Or as one of the silly knuckleheads does, continually posts a list of nonsensical rules as a backdrop to their type of inane clever instead of discussion. And that one poster often plagiarizes information tabbing it as his brilliant thoughts on those rare occasions he might have looked up something. Now, that’s embarrassing.
In any case, they are the tedious ones.
Frequently they rely on highly selective factoids.
AI is a useful tool. That said -- it is a tool. Overuse of AI creates tedious posts.
