Which to be fair is not any different from a lawyer. They’re not perfect either.

The difference is that a lawyer can be held responsible for malpractice. When a chatbot gives harmful advice, who is responsible?

(Obviously, whoever is running it, but so far that hasn’t been established in court.)

If he had had the sense to do that, he would have had the sense to not do it at all.

I’ve already seen plenty of POV porn where the guy has two free hands, so I’m sure it’s a gopro and head strap. Which I’m sure looks ridiculously goofy for anyone else in the room.

As well as your use of fancy quote marks.

The price of the item hasn’t changed, it’s just that they didn’t include tax in the price. Yes, it’s stupid.

Oh, you mean price gouging

That is actually surprising, given people.

GPS units do not transmit, they only receive the signal from the satellites. I wouldn’t take advice from TV fiction.

But it can’t transmit without a modem.

That seems like an unacceptable loophole. I shouldn’t be able to create derivative media and have it be legal and public domain. The unlicensed training itself is a rights violation, and and media produced from it should equally be a violation.

If you can’t validate the answers it gives, I would recommend not using it. It could be giving you complete nonsense in Japanese and you’ll have no way to know until years later someone looks at you funny when you say something and you explain “I learned Japanese from chatgpt”.

The environmental cost is enormous.

It doesn’t expose you to actual creative writing, either. Like people go to museums to see Picasso. This is the equivalent of the art on the wall at Olive Garden.

Your English is fine and your thoughts there are communicated perfectly.