Replying here as the thread won't allow for more. But I'm not following what you are meaning then.
I'm not seeing the outcome from Chevy being poor, any more than "inspect element" would be poor.
You are right - it does seem to allow. But I'm not sure what you exactly mean after 20 minutes as well.
>You just add a disclaimer that none of what the bot says is legally binding
The combination of legality and AI can make for a complex and nuanced problem. A superficial solution like "just add a disclaimer" probably doesn't not capture the nuance to make for a great outcome. I.e., a superficial understanding leads us to oversimplify our solutions. Just like with the responses, it seems like you are in more of a hurry to send a retort than to understand the point.
Why can't it just be a tool for assistance that is not legally binding?
Also throughout this year I have thought about those problems, and to me it's always been weird how people have so much problems with "hallucinations". And I've thought about exact similar ChatBot as Chevy used and how awesome it would be to be able to use something like that myself to find products.
To me the expectations of this having to be legally binding, etc just seem misguided.
AI tools increase my productivity so much, and also people often make up things, lie, but it's even more difficult to tell when they do that, as everyone's different and everyone lies differently.
