I hope Andrew Ng was correct that a great many methods end up largely equivalent given the same amount of input because the current methods deliver a rather useless result.

With a google search you are getting citations and stuck finding the truly good ones that truly match, with chatgpt you are getting an answer from someone who read all those citations and treats them all as equally good.

I think the real problem was to get the most perfect citations given your specific question. We can forgive the error since it took the web a few years to discover that best is rarely a fresh bit of blog spam by a moron who has read everything and refuses to cite sources. So GPT is convincingly as good as a human blogger yet not as useful as a less human emulating tool.