> What I would use the shit out of, though, is a chatbot that has been trained on all the information in the CodePen knowledge base. Have it suck in all the meeting notes.
Yeah, it's pretty good at this, I've recently been hitting up OpenAI's chatGPT with some queries that were too exhausting to extract from google - and it's pretty good at surfacing resources quickly - and the workflow of refining the query with the context of the current thread of conversation works really well when you are struggling to succinctly describe it in a single shot (which google search doesn't really do beyond the global context of your profile - which can actually be counter productive).
I really hate all the hype around chatGPT, it can't be trusted for a lot of stuff, people over anthropomorphise it, but so long as you don't rely on it for accuracy, it's pretty useful for search.
One major issue I found is that ~95% of the time it can't provide correct links to sources, this is fine if it can just name stuff - then you can follow it up with a more specific google search. But chatGPT will just make up bullshit links, in the same way it will wax poetic some BS explanation to hit it's "looks correct" training. You can even point this out and it will keep generating variants on the URLs that are all fabricated.
It kind of makes sense that it would be good at search... it's a language model, it should be able to link descriptions of difficult to search for things to known resources.
Yeah, it's pretty good at this, I've recently been hitting up OpenAI's chatGPT with some queries that were too exhausting to extract from google - and it's pretty good at surfacing resources quickly - and the workflow of refining the query with the context of the current thread of conversation works really well when you are struggling to succinctly describe it in a single shot (which google search doesn't really do beyond the global context of your profile - which can actually be counter productive).
I really hate all the hype around chatGPT, it can't be trusted for a lot of stuff, people over anthropomorphise it, but so long as you don't rely on it for accuracy, it's pretty useful for search.
One major issue I found is that ~95% of the time it can't provide correct links to sources, this is fine if it can just name stuff - then you can follow it up with a more specific google search. But chatGPT will just make up bullshit links, in the same way it will wax poetic some BS explanation to hit it's "looks correct" training. You can even point this out and it will keep generating variants on the URLs that are all fabricated.
It kind of makes sense that it would be good at search... it's a language model, it should be able to link descriptions of difficult to search for things to known resources.