zlacker

Agreed. Been testing out responses to parsing complex genomics papers (say, a methodology section describing parameters of some algorithm) and its mostly rephrasing rather than digesting and responding with useful information / interpretation. And it will use so many words and imbue so little to the conversation, yet appear like it's helping because ... words.

>>NobleL+(OP)
> complex genomics papers

I think it's fair to say this is not one of the use cases where it shines. It's not great at logic, it's also not that smart.

That's exactly what the hype does. Too big claims and then it gets dismissed when it inevitably doesn't live up to the hype.

>>NobleL+(OP)
Yeah you can't use it for academic research, it's really, really terrible at it.

It will even claim it can generate citations for you too, which is pretty messed up because when I tried it just fabricated them replete with faked DOIs.

Where it shines is at squishy language stuff, like generating the framework of an email, paraphrasing a paragraph for you, or summarizing a news article.

It really is revolutionary at language tasks, but unfortunately the hype machine and these weird "AI sycophants" have caused people to dramatically overestimate it's use cases.