When ChatGPT can and does hallucinate information it disqualifies itself as a reliable source. Citing it as a source is exactly the same level as “my mate Keith said”, even if it’s more reliable on average than Keith.
Nobody claimed it was a reliable source. However, the fact is that people use it to answer questions anyway - and in cases like this, I think it’s good to let people know where you got the info so they can take it with a grain of salt. The same applies to your friend Kevin, who’s just as likely to confidently spread false info as the truth.
I don’t think that shaming people for using chatGPT is useful. They’re not going to stop using it - they’ll just not tell about it then which is worse.
When ChatGPT can and does hallucinate information it disqualifies itself as a reliable source. Citing it as a source is exactly the same level as “my mate Keith said”, even if it’s more reliable on average than Keith.
Nobody claimed it was a reliable source. However, the fact is that people use it to answer questions anyway - and in cases like this, I think it’s good to let people know where you got the info so they can take it with a grain of salt. The same applies to your friend Kevin, who’s just as likely to confidently spread false info as the truth.
I don’t think that shaming people for using chatGPT is useful. They’re not going to stop using it - they’ll just not tell about it then which is worse.
Oh, they’ll tell. ChatGPT users are the vegans of the digital age.