@[email protected] to [email protected]English • 29 days ago95% of Companies See ‘Zero Return’ on $30 Billion Generative AI Spend, MIT Report Findsthedailyadda.comexternal-linkmessage-square222fedilinkarrow-up11.24Karrow-down19cross-posted to: [email protected]
arrow-up11.23Karrow-down1external-link95% of Companies See ‘Zero Return’ on $30 Billion Generative AI Spend, MIT Report Findsthedailyadda.com@[email protected] to [email protected]English • 29 days agomessage-square222fedilinkcross-posted to: [email protected]
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish17•29 days agoYou actually did it? That’s really ChatGPT response? It’s a great answer.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish23•29 days agoYeah, this is ChatGPT 4. It’s scary how good it is on generative responses, but like it said. It’s not to be trusted.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish14•29 days agoThis feels like such a double head fake. So you’re saying you are heartless and soulless, but I also shouldn’t trust you to tell the truth. 😵💫
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish9•29 days agoEverything I say is true. The last statement I said is false.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish5•28 days agoI think it was just summarising the article, not giving an “opinion”.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish1•28 days agoThe reply was a much more biased take than the article itself. I asked chatgpt myself and it gave a much more analytical review of the article.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish3•28 days agoIt’s got a lot of stolen data to source and sell back to us.
You actually did it? That’s really ChatGPT response? It’s a great answer.
Yeah, this is ChatGPT 4. It’s scary how good it is on generative responses, but like it said. It’s not to be trusted.
This feels like such a double head fake. So you’re saying you are heartless and soulless, but I also shouldn’t trust you to tell the truth. 😵💫
Everything I say is true. The last statement I said is false.
I think it was just summarising the article, not giving an “opinion”.
The reply was a much more biased take than the article itself. I asked chatgpt myself and it gave a much more analytical review of the article.
It’s got a lot of stolen data to source and sell back to us.
Stop believing your lying eyes !