If my friend has a million times more knowledge than the average human being, then I'm willing to put up with a 30% error rate on references.
And I'm talking about references when doing deep academic research. Looking them up is absolutely a productive use of time -- I'm asking for the references so I can read them. I'm not asking for them for fun.
Remember, it's hundreds of times easier to verify information than it is to find it in the first place. That's the basic principle of what makes LLM's so incredibly valuable.
But how can you be sure that the info is correct if it made up the reference? Where did it pull the info? What good is a friend that's just bullshiting their way through every conversation hoping you wouldn't notice?
A third of the time is an insane number, if 30% of code that I wrote contained non existent headers I would be fired long ago.
A person who's bullshitting their way doesn't get a 70% accuracy. For yes/no questions they'll get 50%. For open ended questions they'll be lucky to get 1%.
You're really underestimating the difficulty of getting 70% accuracy for general open-ended questions.
And while you might think you're better than 70%, I'm pretty sure if you didn't run your code through compilers and linters, and testing for at least a couple times, your code doesn't get anywhere near 70% correct.
And I'm talking about references when doing deep academic research. Looking them up is absolutely a productive use of time -- I'm asking for the references so I can read them. I'm not asking for them for fun.
Remember, it's hundreds of times easier to verify information than it is to find it in the first place. That's the basic principle of what makes LLM's so incredibly valuable.