Same can be said of search engines, encyclopedias, or wikis compared to seeking out books, journals, and other source material. If you don't sit there for 8 hours in a library to find the same information on your own, you've missed out on the experience. It's a standard Luddite's argument. Tools of any kind that enhance efficiency have always actualized lazy outcomes. It has always been the human responsibility to, not only rely on their best effort, but to figure out what actually encompasses their best possible effort.
but that is being addressed. there is a difference between looking at 10 search results vs clicking "i am feeling lucky". asking an LLM always just gives you one answer without an opportunity to research and compare multiple possible answers.
a search engine always gives multiple results and it is on me to read and compare. i usually look at the first half a dozen or so results.
a well written wikipedia article will represent multiple views and critical opinions if there are any. but if there aren't then you may want to expand your search. same goes for other encyclopedias or articles you are reading.
the problem, again, is that an LLM answer does not have the quality of a well written article you may find elsewhere. that may change in the future, but until then i find LLMs are a waste of time for me.
i don't trust the search engine. i open the first half dozen links to check them, and if they are not good i try a different search engine.
if an LLM actually returns multiple links, than that's better, i haven't actually used LLMs that much. but then i would just open all those links and check them, ignoring whatever the LLM writes about those links. at which point the question is, for this particular usage is there even any difference between an LLM and a search engine?
I have a relative who claims, because hen is dyslexic, that hen thinks better and deeper than any normal person due to the inability to learn by reading since that is so, to the point where hen claims not to be subject to any of the well-known cognitive biases.
