JinTech

AppleZulu said:

P.P.S. I just repeated the above experiment in Pages, using Apple’s link to Chat GPT. It also produced hallucinated references. I just chased down the first citation in the bibliography it created. Searching for the cited article didn’t turn up anything. I did find the cited journal, went to it and searched for the cited title, got nothing. Searched for the authors, got nothing.  Finally, I browsed to find the issue supposedly containing the referenced article, and that article does not exist. So Apple gets demerits for subbing in ChatGPT in their uncharacteristic worry that they not be perceived as being “late.” This part does not fit their usual pattern, with the exception perhaps of their hastened switch to Apple Maps, based largely at first on third-party map data. In the long run, their divorce from Google maps was important, as location services was rapidly becoming a core OS function, not just a sat nav driving convenience that can adequately be left to third party apps. The race to use AI is perhaps analog, but the hopefully temporary inclusion of ChatGPT’s garbage should be as embarrassing as those early Apple Maps with bridges that went underwater, etc. 

This is why Apple puts a caution that you are using ChatGPT and not Siri. It would be embarrassing if Apple baked ChatGPT into Siri and called this content their own. 

alterbentzion said:

A few years ago, Cincinnati Children's Hospital standardized on iPhones and Epic/MyChart, with an iPad at every bedside. The laptops, though, still run Windows - and just this morning, as the nurses started the Q&A before my son's outpatient procedure, they complained about poorly-working computers.

What would be truly life-changing, though, would be for Apple to get involved in the user interfaces for medical equipment, the way they've moved into the automotive space.

auxio said:

danthephotoman said:

It is my understanding the price increase is to pay for the intense computing needed for some of the advanced AI features.  This is a revolutionary change in the way we create.  I'm not sure why they should be free.  I think a lot of people will pay extra for revolutionary features.

Then why not make AI features a paid option? Especially for students. There's a certain air of elitism in assuming everyone who uses Adobe software is a paid professional.