Like many things, a tool is only as smart as the wielder. There's still a ton of critical thinking that needs to happen as you do something as simple as bake bread. Using an AI tool to suggest ingredients can be useful from a creative perspective, but should not be assumed accurate at face value. Raisins and Dill? maybe ¯\(ツ)/¯, haven't tried that one myself.

I like AI, for being able to add detail to things or act as a muse, but it cannot be trusted for anything important. This is why I'm 'anti-AI'. Too many people (especially in leadership roles) see this tool as a solution for replacing expensive humans with something that 'does the thinking'; but as we've seen elsewhere in this thread, AI CANT THINK. It only suggests items that are statistically likely to be next/near based on its input.

In the Security Operations space, we have a phrase "trust but verify". For anything AI, I would use 'doubt, then verify" instead. That all said. AI might very well give you a pointer to the place to ask how much motrin an infant should get. Hopefully, that's your local pediatrician.

Seeing as ChatGPT was trained on other peoples' books, articles, etc., it's not surprising he says that.

Kinda slimy that he probably couldn't even give sources for his new-found child wisdom. Y'know, because ChatGPT is a glorified corporate piracy machine using stolen data and aggregating it for morons like him to read instead of doing a google search.

That man has kids?‍️

One, through surrogacy. Did he ask AI to explain to him how to fill his little jizz cup?

Fairly based. If you verify the output by visiting trusted medical sites, you won't need a doctor for many things. Learn to do it on your own, become a medic. You have a kid, don't rely on others for its survival. Only in emergency should a professional be needed.

There, nuance.

Do you think I was being sarcastic? I was serious. That burn was awesome and it legitimately made me laugh lol

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if lots of new parents are asking LLMs for advice.

And before AI (and probably still), new parents probably googled a lot of things.

And before internet search engines, new parents probably checked out books from libraries.

Parenting books were serious business, whole generations were raised with Dr Spock for instance, who had fucked up ideas about childrearing.

It's one thing to ask for tips on getting a baby to sleep, it's another to ask it for formula recipes. Unfortunately I doubt most parents know the line where it becomes dangerous, but I am hoping here.

The AI hate is so weird, morons because we dont want to aggregate ourselves? The dangers are huge, the costs are ridiculous, the shareprice is bubbling. Its a heap of shit but your comment is just nonsense.

It is miles better to get aggregated information from multiple sources than read each source yourself. Consumers want convenience.

before that it was Youtube, for certain things, which at least was somewhat helpful to niche questions.

why not hire nannies, or unless he prefers male ones because hes gay. and since male nannies are probably also wierd to begin with.

doesnt look like it, elon has a breeding eugenics fetish. he has a breeding fetish like that 17bn-aire that just announced he will give his inhertience to his 100+children.

God forbid he should have asked his parents. Or the kids nanny.

I don't believe the idea of aggregating information is bad, moreso the ability to properly vet your sources yourself.

I don't know what sources an AI chatbot could be pulling from. It could be a lot of sources, or it could be one source. Does it know which sources are reliable? Not really. AI has been infamous for hallucinating even with simple prompts.

Being able to independently check where your info comes from is an important part of stopping the spread of misinfo. AI can't do that, and, in it's current state, I wouldn't want it to try.

Convenience is a rat race of cutting corners. What is convenient isn't always what is best in the long run.