A better way to contribute to the discussion would be to add your thoughts after “I used chat gpt to summarize the articles” instead of copying the LLM output.
I’m going to very lightly disagree here and say that I found this informative and it saved me from having to read the entire platforms and then summarize them for myself.
We are all responsible for educating ourselves and llms are error prone but that does not remove all the value from this post. Today, this post helped me better understand the history of our parties in a way that wouldn’t have happened otherwise.
Would it have been better if a domain expert had stepped in and summarized, absolutely. But we can’t all be domain experts, we don’t all have all the time to read all the things. Sometimes it’s nice that we have an algorithm that can do a “good enough” job at summarizing things.
I wanted to support more people understanding the information without having to read through 326 pages (exaggeration, of course) as some of us are time bound. Others won’t take the time of say to click either link at all. This provides the opportunity to read a quick summary without the need of deep diving. I was transparent about it as to not be misleading in any way.
Often there are times when I wish someone would do this on posts because the amount of and mixture of relevant and non relevant information can be overwhelming and/or time consuming.
My goal was to show the relevant information in an easy to read format. I thought it would be more important to spread the information than to share my own thoughts on the matter.
A better way to contribute to the discussion would be to add your thoughts after “I used chat gpt to summarize the articles” instead of copying the LLM output.
I’m going to very lightly disagree here and say that I found this informative and it saved me from having to read the entire platforms and then summarize them for myself.
We are all responsible for educating ourselves and llms are error prone but that does not remove all the value from this post. Today, this post helped me better understand the history of our parties in a way that wouldn’t have happened otherwise.
Would it have been better if a domain expert had stepped in and summarized, absolutely. But we can’t all be domain experts, we don’t all have all the time to read all the things. Sometimes it’s nice that we have an algorithm that can do a “good enough” job at summarizing things.
You’re right. Their “this is an LLM summary” contributed to the discussion regardless of any additional commentary.
I wanted to support more people understanding the information without having to read through 326 pages (exaggeration, of course) as some of us are time bound. Others won’t take the time of say to click either link at all. This provides the opportunity to read a quick summary without the need of deep diving. I was transparent about it as to not be misleading in any way.
Often there are times when I wish someone would do this on posts because the amount of and mixture of relevant and non relevant information can be overwhelming and/or time consuming.
My goal was to show the relevant information in an easy to read format. I thought it would be more important to spread the information than to share my own thoughts on the matter.
Or they could have just not said they used an LLM to summarize but the output has a very LLM AI feel to it.