I use AI to help write these posts. Does that mean they’re not mine? Hell no.The media and academia are panicking, but the truth is: AI doesn’t kill writing—it kills the illusion that only certain people are allowed to do it well.
This was super helpful. I always avoid using AI when I write my posts but I tried it with the prompt you suggested and it did find something useful I could add to a recent post.
What I used to think about the mainstream media was that at least you were getting a known quantity and a level of something you could trust. I'm no longer convinced that this is the case, but if anyone can write an equally good (in terms of writing quality) piece, how do you distinguish between the actual good quality, in terms of information, and the garbage/lies that are also out there? This isn't really a question about AI, more a question about where to go for real news in the world these days.
That is an amazingly good question. I'd argue you actually know the author and trust her or him. Fake news already dominates and it's about to get exponentially worse. It's about to go from bias based on perspective to actual differences in facts and visuals to back each fake reality up. The only things you can truly trust are what you actually know.
Assuming you’re using the paid model and not the free model? Beyond that, it’s ALL prompt engineering and corrections. When it makes a mistake repremand it. Ask it to ask you questions. TONS of questions. Ask it to give you multiple options for allocations along with strengths and weaknesses of each. Essentially don’t think of it (for now) as a one stop shop you go to and get the solution. Think of it as a early career subject matter expert who needs guidance and wisdom but can perform SUPER quickly and costs essentially “nothing.”
Plus, to be real, a lot of so-called financial planners and experts you’d be lucky to get 90% back after fees and whatnot. Not to mention the outright thieves out there like Abramoff. :)
This was super helpful. I always avoid using AI when I write my posts but I tried it with the prompt you suggested and it did find something useful I could add to a recent post.
What I used to think about the mainstream media was that at least you were getting a known quantity and a level of something you could trust. I'm no longer convinced that this is the case, but if anyone can write an equally good (in terms of writing quality) piece, how do you distinguish between the actual good quality, in terms of information, and the garbage/lies that are also out there? This isn't really a question about AI, more a question about where to go for real news in the world these days.
That is an amazingly good question. I'd argue you actually know the author and trust her or him. Fake news already dominates and it's about to get exponentially worse. It's about to go from bias based on perspective to actual differences in facts and visuals to back each fake reality up. The only things you can truly trust are what you actually know.
To be honest, that is kind of terrifying.
Yup. It is terrifying. The good news is Gen z already doesn't believe anything they see so they're safe.
I asked ChatGPT to reallocate my 401k today. Twice it came back totaling only 90%.
Assuming you’re using the paid model and not the free model? Beyond that, it’s ALL prompt engineering and corrections. When it makes a mistake repremand it. Ask it to ask you questions. TONS of questions. Ask it to give you multiple options for allocations along with strengths and weaknesses of each. Essentially don’t think of it (for now) as a one stop shop you go to and get the solution. Think of it as a early career subject matter expert who needs guidance and wisdom but can perform SUPER quickly and costs essentially “nothing.”
Plus, to be real, a lot of so-called financial planners and experts you’d be lucky to get 90% back after fees and whatnot. Not to mention the outright thieves out there like Abramoff. :)