Your experience highlights what current iterations of LLMs are not well suited for, so I understand if that's what you were hoping to achieve, why you were left wanting, or disillusioned.

There's a lot of things that LLMs are really good at, or incredibly useful for, such as ingesting large bodies of text, and then analyzing them based on your ability to create well thought out prompts.

This can save you hours and hours, of reading time, and it's something that you can verify the answer on relatively quickly, to double check the LLMs response accuracy.

They're also good at doing something Google used to be good at, but sucks at now. Which enabling you to describe process, simple or complicated, short or long, that you either can't recall the name of, or aren't even sure where it's called, and letting you know exactly what it is. Also, easily verifiable.

There's plenty of other things too, but just remember that they are tools, not magic, or sentient intelligence.

The models are not real time, but there are tricks to figure out it's most recent dates of ingestion, such as asking topical entertainment or news questions, but don't go looking for a real-time information.

Also, I have yet to find a model that can provide an actual URL and specific source for anything it generates, which is why it's a good practice to use them to do tasks, or get information, that would take you longer to do, or get, manually, but that can be easily verified once you receive it.

Scolded me for swearing at it.

"You'll fucking know when I'm swearing at you," was my reply to that shit the last time I gave it a spin (after it regurgitated nonsense after many prompts specifically asking for not nonsense).

Garbage in garbage out. You give a shit prompt, you generally get a shit answer.

I hope sonething better comes along because google ruined their search engine a decade ago. stract.com is probabky the closest to what google used to be.

As for chatgpt, it is not an index. It cannot refer you back to infornation it was trained on because it doesn't build a massive indexed internet database.

It has some method of probable relations and conglomerarion of input. It is why it "hallucinates" information output, because it doesn't "know" what is wrong or right info, it just fetches data based on probabilities of connections.

It is good at suggesting new music or movies based on your list of media you like, but it is terrible with actual factual info

The funniest part is that all the AI hype is focused on all the wrong things. There are absolutely great AI tools that get very little mention.

For example, I'm visually impaired and use AI tools A fair bit to help me get around the internet and such. Especially when it comes to using AI I to generate descriptions of images.

See that it's never going to make money, go public, hand the keys over to someone else, and then try again with a wallet full of cash and a reputation for making billion dollar businesses.

I'd say they've probably long reached the point where they have enough customers around the world to hold the load on their servers fairly constant. The example with one user only taking 5% of a servers load only works for low customer counts, similar to how you can't count on one wind turbine or solar plant to provide all of your energy but if you have enough of them you can provide a base line of fairly constant energy