ChatGPT-4 significantly increased performance of business consultants

Post by matheusmoreira » Sat, Sep 30, 2023, 5:06 PM UTC

hutzlibu wrote: post #56

dopylitty wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m starting to think there’s an LLM equivalent to the old saying about how everything the media writes is accurate except on the topics you’re an expert in. All LLM output looks to be good quality except when it’s output you’re an expert in. People who have no background in writing or editing think LLMs will revolutionize those fields. Actual writers and editors take one look at LLM output and can see it’s basically…

LLMs are not worthless for programming. You just cannot expect it to ship a full programm for you, but for generating functions with limited scope, I found it very useful. How to make use of a new and common libary for example. But of course you have to check and test. And for text I know people who use it succesfully (professionally) to generate texts for them as a summary from some data. They still have to proof re…

Post by aofjfdgnionio » Sat, Sep 30, 2023, 5:08 PM UTC

benreesman wrote: post #170

aofjfdgnionio wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't buy it. LLMs cannot do anything reliably, no matter how constrained the domain. Their outputs are of acceptable quality when back to a person who will use their human brain to paper over the cracks. People can recognize when the output is garbage, figure out minor ambiguities, and subconsciously correct minor factual or logical errors. But I would never feed LLM results directly into another computer program…

I’m sympathetic to the instinct to push back on the absurd boosterism (these things are an existential threat to humanity this year ), it’s fucking annoying. But they can do plenty of useful stuff reliably. It’s not “be generally intelligent”, which they are just nothing even remotely close to, but know you don’t dig the LLM hype from that comment? Yeah, they get that every time.

Post by marcosdumay » Sat, Sep 30, 2023, 5:12 PM UTC

hutzlibu wrote: post #111

Roark66 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>LLMs are not worthless for programming. They can be worse than worthless. They can sabotage your work if you let them making you spend even more time fixing it afterwards. For an example. I've used Gpt4 as a sort of Google on steroids with prompts like "do subnets in gcloud span azs" and ", "in gcloud secret manager can you access secrets across regions". I very quickly learned to ask "is it true" after every answer…

"They can be worse than worthless." But that is the same, when you blindly follow some stackoverflow answer. And yes, I always have to tweak and I use it only rarely. But when I did, it was faster than googling and parsing the results.

Post by pydry » Sat, Sep 30, 2023, 5:14 PM UTC

mistrial9 wrote: post #209

pydry wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's easy to be cynical about this It's probably easier to assume that their job is to provide objective expert advice since thats what they say they do. I'm being realistic here, not cynical.

the comment might be spot-on for some companies and industry, but really.. not all business culture is the same. By painting "all management" in this light you are showing the same one-dimensional thinking that is being criticized here..

Post by hcks » Sat, Sep 30, 2023, 5:19 PM UTC

jack_riminton wrote: post #169

WendyTheWillow wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s also insane people think running a large business is easy, or that management consultants aren’t worth what they’re paid.

Worth here is the key word. I did an MBA which was specifically designed to get people into consulting, we did many consulting projects for real multinantionals and the key lesson was: "What does the hidden client want?" i.e. someone has been tasked with getting some consultants to come up with a suggestion, the key question however is what does THEIR boss want to hear. If you can work that out and give it to them th…