Sounds like the other user tolerates the flaws and works around them, while you don't and expect to not be fact checking every statement. I guess people's approaches to this can be very wide.
I am more on your side, personally. When learning, I do not want to spend half my time scrutinizing the teacher. At least not on the objective fundamentals. If the fundamentals are broken, how do I trust anything built on top?
And that's the scary thing: LLM's don't "build on top", they more or less do the equivalent of running around the globe first and come back with an answer.
I am more on your side, personally. When learning, I do not want to spend half my time scrutinizing the teacher. At least not on the objective fundamentals. If the fundamentals are broken, how do I trust anything built on top?
And that's the scary thing: LLM's don't "build on top", they more or less do the equivalent of running around the globe first and come back with an answer.