I'm a good programmer and I still find LLMs to be great for banging out python scripts to handle one-off tasks. I usually use Copilot, it seems best for that sort of thing. Often the first version of the script will have a bug or misunderstanding in it, but all you need to do is tell the LLM what it did wrong or paste the text of the exception into the chat and it'll usually fix its own mistakes quite well.
I could write those scripts myself by hand if I wanted to, but they'd take a lot longer and I'd be spending my time on boring stuff. Why not let a machine do the boring stuff? That's why we have technology.
If you're careless with your prompting, sure. The "default style" of ChatGPT is widely known at this point. If you want it to sound different you'll need to provide some context to tell it what you want it to sound like.
Or just use one of the many other LLMs out there to mix things up a bit. When I'm brainstorming I usually use Chatbot Arena to bounce ideas around, it's a page where you can send a prompt to two randomly-selected LLMs and then by voting on which gave a better response you help rank them on a leaderboard. This way I get to run my prompts through a lot of variety.
Maybe the "obviously doesn't work" and "adds only minor improvements" things are just your personal experience, and for other people it is working and it adds significant improvements.
Google is in competition with other search engines, more now than it's been in many years. So maybe they're adding new features like this because it actually does improve the competitiveness of their search engine.
I have a surprise for you: there were big updates to Paint in Windows 11. Most notably AI image generation features. So that may affect your girlfriend-drawing endeavours.
Back on Reddit it seemed like a standard pattern that every once in a while some particular subject would come up that was popular to dislike, and a generalized negative sentiment would wash gently across the zeitgeist for a while before eventually receding. My theory is that being part of a mob is fun, it lets you unleash righteous anger and feel validation along with the rush of endorphins, so it's a self-perpetuating pattern.
Here on the Fediverse it feels more like a steady lashing storm of waves. Right now Windows 11 is hated. In most threads it's impossible to say something that is insufficiently negative about it without getting tons of downvotes.
Oh well. If Karma was meaningless on Reddit, it's doubly meaningless here. So I'll just keep on saying my thing.
And actually, my point is just that you should feel equally bad for them. They're both people who chose to be there and they're both people that died. If you don't want to feel bad for them then that's fine too.
So a few hundred Sherpa (profession) would be completely unable to find other jobs, like their hundreds of thousands of bretheren have somehow managed to do.
Look, I don't want people to die on Everest. But nobody is forced to go there, not even the Sherpas. They choose to go there. They know what they're getting into and what the risks are. If you're going to feel bad for them then you should also feel bad for the climbers, and vice versa.
According to Wikipedia there's ~600,000 Sherpas in the world. Are you seriously saying that the only thing they can do to avoid poverty is work as Everest guides (or have an extended family member doing it)?
Only to the extent that Google's search results already had Reddit data in them. This AI is summarizing the search results it's being given, not making stuff up on its own.
But it doesn't suck. The AI is summarizing the search results it's getting. If the search results say things that are wrong, the summary will also be wrong. Do you want the AI to somehow magically be the arbiter of objective reality? How would it do that?
On two occasions I have been asked, – "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" ... I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question"
-- Charles Babbage
This confusion would appear to continue to this day.
Why is it even remotely surprising or unexpected that an AI that's summarizing web search results for you can sometimes give false, misleading, or dangerous answers? The search results contain false, misleading, and dangerous answers sometimes. The problem is not the AI. It's doing exactly what it's supposed to be doing.
I work for a big giant corporation and plenty of its computers don't run Enterprise Windows.
A lawsuit would come in the case that Microsoft was lying about whether you could disable those features. Microsoft has put toggles for them into the settings, if it turns out that those toggles don't actually disable the things they claim to disable then that's where Microsoft is going to face legal issues. Do you really think Microsoft cares enough about the tiny portion of their customer base that's going to change the default settings that they would risk that sort of lawsuit to "spy" on them?