←back to thread

446 points walterbell | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
sepositus ◴[] No.43577309[source]
> Participants weren’t lazy. They were experienced professionals. But when the tool responded quickly, confidently, and clearly they stopped doing the hard part.

This seems contradictory to me. I suspect most experienced professionals start with the premise that the LLM is untrustworthy due to its nature. If they didn't research the tool and its limitations, that's lazy. At some point, they stopped believing in this limitation and offloaded more of their thinking to it. Why did they stop? I can't think of a single reason other than being lazy. I don't accept the premise that it's because the tool responded quickly, confidently, and clearly. It did that the first 100 times they used it when they were probably still skeptical.

Am I missing something?

replies(4): >>43577353 #>>43577384 #>>43577648 #>>43578230 #
1. ip26 ◴[] No.43578230[source]
Could have performed accurately in their past usage, building trust. Sometimes it will also get something right that is downright shocking, far beyond what you hoped.