"teach you all".

So you don't know enough to evaluate the answers. Or where to find the original sources it quoted or mixed.

Original sources aren’t necessarily infallible either, but that’s beside the point, asking ChatGPT needs to be viewed as asking a person to recount something from memory. It hasn’t been reviewed or edited so it’s like a first draft rather than a published document. That’s the error that people tend to make since they treat it like a search engine instead of a conversation.

> they treat it like a search engine instead of a conversation.

That's because web searches are so polluted that for a lot of purposes even ChatGPT 3.5 is better.

Um yes I do? Lol why do you just assume this?

It is, unquestionably, from the math, a "word gargler" as you put it.

https://xkcd.com/1838/

No it's a digital neural network expressing it's inputs and outputs in language.

If you trust the words that machine strings together, you're making dangerous assumptions - look at the lawyers getting busted for submitting fake cases. These things are literally designed to sound plausible as the primary concern - facts aren't really a thing.