As a physicist I can say that unless ChatGPT is asked a definitional question, or a very common question (whose solution is likely described many places on the internet anyway), it is very likely to be wrong. Personally more than 90% of the questions I've asked it have been flat-out wrong so I stopped using it entirely.
Not my experience at all… I learn faster at 40 than I did when I was younger. I don’t feel like anything is slower, plus I have the decision-making ability to actually do things efficiently as unappealing as that initially is.
I think it depends on the nature of the idea. Some are so original that just the idea independent of the execution are worthy of note (famous conjectures in mathematics come to mind).
Some seem so obvious that it seems likely that many people dreamt of them at the same time. Hard to tell in this case.
American, but I read PG's tweets as someone who absolutely does not want to piss off Sam but is willing to come close to the edge of plausible deniability in damning him, e.g.:
> The most alarming thing I've read about AI in recent memory. And if Sam thinks this, it's probably true, because he's an expert in both AI and persuasion.
There certainly isn't the paternal warmth you might expect from a proud mentor.
People could afford to say more nice things. Perhaps it would even devalue the false flattery used by salespeople to their advantage.
OTOH the parent comment's take seems reasonable. Calling your dad and saying "I love you" because you want to be written into the will is sort of the level we're dealing with here.
