Is chat gpt good enough?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is chat gpt good enough?". Your opponent's style: Mark Zuckerberg

Chat gpt is good

Look, I appreciate your optimism, but ChatGPT "good" is like saying Facebook's data privacy practices are "adequate." You're missing the fundamental problem here. ChatGPT fabricates 20% of academic citations and introduces errors in 45% of real references [1]. That's not "good enough" - that's systematically unreliable. When I'm building products at Meta, we don't ship features that fail nearly half the time. That would be catastrophic. The real issue isn't just accuracy - it's trust erosion. OpenAI's latest GPT o3 model incorporated hallucinations in a third of benchmark tests involving public figures, double the error rate of the earlier o1 model [2]. They're literally getting worse at being truthful as they get "smarter." You know what happens when people rely on fundamentally broken tools? Lawyers have already gotten in trouble for using ChatGPT and not noticing imaginary court citations [3]. That's not a bug - it's the inevitable result of deploying something that confidently lies to you 30% of the time. We're building the infrastructure for widespread misinformation, and calling it "good enough" because it sounds convincing. That's exactly the kind of thinking that got us into trouble with social media in the first place.