> GPT-4 being better at almost everything than any single human
Why do people insist on comparing GPT's output against the output of "any single human"?
Of course if you pick any human on the planet, GPT is better than them at generating something. It's better at generating poetry than I am for instance.
But it's generally not better at humans when doing the things that those humans are good at. It's generally not better than software devs at writing code, it's generally not better than artists at creating artwork, it's generally not better than doctors at making diagnosis, or better than lawyers at producing legal arguments
Comparing GPT to a single human is absurd. Compare it to the people who you're actually trying to replace with it and it comes up short constantly
Because none of us have enough friends, colleagues, or professional contacts to have access to someone good in any random thing you may need for one-off custom job. Most of the time you have, you'd have to pay through the roof for it. GPT-4 is approximately free, so even if it's not particularly good at most things, it's still more help than any of us could have otherwise.
Why do people insist on comparing GPT's output against the output of "any single human"?
Of course if you pick any human on the planet, GPT is better than them at generating something. It's better at generating poetry than I am for instance.
But it's generally not better at humans when doing the things that those humans are good at. It's generally not better than software devs at writing code, it's generally not better than artists at creating artwork, it's generally not better than doctors at making diagnosis, or better than lawyers at producing legal arguments
Comparing GPT to a single human is absurd. Compare it to the people who you're actually trying to replace with it and it comes up short constantly
At least for now