> No robust solution to hallucinations

ChatGPT/Claude still sucks at providing factual info. You can see how in some areas (like coding), massive amounts of training has taken place, and the model is almost always right when recalling existing knowledge, particularly if you ask about the major frameworks. Then there are somewhat more obscure topics, where the models are mostly right, but can be convincigly wrong, and it's very hard to tell which is which.

If you ask about something that wasn't deemed to have economic value, such as book recommendations (I thought a model that was advertised to have been trained on the entirety of human literaly works would be good at that), what you get is almost always obviously wrong info.