The goal should be to be able to just talk your model without any engineering. If you as a normal user can not interact with an AI then the AI is just not smart.
back
2 comments
"AI" isn't smart. Doesn't mean it's not useful if you know how to use it.
I hope Andrew Ng was correct that a great many methods end up largely equivalent given the same amount of input because the current methods deliver a rather useless result.
With a google search you are getting citations and stuck finding the truly good ones that truly match, with chatgpt you are getting an answer from someone who read all those citations and treats them all as equally good.
I think the real problem was to get the most perfect citations given your specific question. We can forgive the error since it took the web a few years to discover that best is rarely a fresh bit of blog spam by a moron who has read everything and refuses to cite sources. So GPT is convincingly as good as a human blogger yet not as useful as a less human emulating tool.
The goal is for the end-user to just be able to talk to your model. But to get there, there is some additional "engineer" needed to be done.
What does "smart" mean to you in this context?