— ChatGPT arguing its own case
This pattern...
<1-3 paragraphs of ChatGPT generated text here>
<Summary saying I used ChatGPT to write this>
But now the novelty is wearing thin and all I see are the fallacies inherent in trying to put this forward as some sort of argument/comment in favour of a viewpoint... because I'm still giving the commenter the benefit of the doubt and assuming they are trying to make a substantive contribution to the discussion.
- False Attribution (https://www.logicalfallacies.org/false-cause-and-false-attri...) almost universally at play since before the bait and switch they are attributing AI/ML blather for that of a genuine human's reasoning and opinion, revealing it was from the AI doesn't remove that. By virtue of posting it on your own account, there is the inherent presumption that its coming from the human who registered the account, and thus the false attribution.
- Written by a real human, I promise
And the fact that ChatGPT answers are easy to produce means that more people can contribute.
Actually, that means that fewer people and one robot will contribute.
But as the SO administrators say, these answer are close enough to true to require a lot of effort on the part administrators - and this stuff may promise a rocky road for answer and discussion sites in the near future. And that would not mean that more people are "participating" either.
— Human who watches SciFi movies
Can't agree. When writing code I actually pretty sure that 1 + 1 = 2, and 100 + 100 = 200. Of course, of course it could be not true for all languages and all environments, but in one language and in one environment 1 + 1 = 2 is true is always, and not with 99.9999999% chance.
Thats my issue with ChatGPT answers - I can't trust it. ChatGPT shifts complexity of reading, analyzing, verifying correctness of answer to human.
After the abuse: intelligent experts using their time to check the vaticinations of a delirious toy.