I did not read this particular article, I was explaining that from my own experience, all these articles telling how great ChatGPT is seem to be made up because my experience (and from what I read I'm not alone) is completely opposite. Maybe it's not able to solve the type of questions I ask? Fine. But it's not how ChatGPT is presented most of the times.
It costs you zero dollar to not post an irrelavant comment then. I really wonder how you justify this "I didn't read the article, but I have a very, very strong opinion (straight up calling it a made-up) on it" behavior. The internet is rotting people's brains I guess.
I've now read the article and I'm not changing my opinion. ChatGPT can do some things very well and people tend to hype those things and claim it's better than humans rather than recognising its limits. And again, you are still missing the point of my comment despite having read it, so I'm out of patience. Maybe try to ask ChatGPT to explain what I meant :)
To be fair, the opinion is thoroughly justified by the article, which might have been more honestly titled Physicians' Reddit comments shorter than ChatGPT responses; relative accuracy unknown...
And unsurprisingly, the average 52 word Reddit comments [isolated from the context of other comments] didn't provide very much information compared with a much more verbose chatbot. The relevance of the ChatGPT response to the actual patient condition remains unknown.
This is relevant to the real world of primary care only if your sole access to a medical professional is Reddit...
And it costs zero to you to ignore my comment especially if you don't understand it. Other people seem to have understood what I meant and posted constructive responses, you didn't, but honestly it's not my problem.
