Hobbies aren’t as fun when you have an overbearing friend who constantly shows off how much more they know and how quickly they can switch to talking about anything you want but in greater depth than you.
Hobbies aren’t as fun when you have an overbearing friend who constantly shows off how much more they know and how quickly they can switch to talking about anything you want but in greater depth than you.
I do not have a single hobby where I'm very far beyond the median hobby-haver in skill (that is to say: if you took all other humans who share my hobby, I'm likely somewhere near median for all of them). This may put me in top whatever percentile among all humans, since most humans don't share my hobbies and so are terrible at those things, but there are enough humans out there, and enough humans who share my hobbies, that I have always known that there are people who are vastly better at them than I am. Now yes, if I was constantly being followed around by one of the top 10 hobby-havers, pointing out to me all the mistakes or sub-optimal decisions I was making, that would indeed be annoying and reduce my enjoyment in the hobby. But why do you expect AI to be like this? I would love if I had one of those top 10 hobby-havers on call to answer every one of my (often inane) questions with infinite patience (and who would only talk about the hobby when I specifically initiated the topic). I'm already under no illusions that I'm the best, but it's now easier than it has ever been (for some hobbies, I expect others to join them over time) to get better at them....if one so desires.
mathematicians or physicists fall into this category of knowing a lot about many thing . Sabine videos for example . she knows everything it seems
She is just arrogant. And asserts a lot of silly opinion as fact, her stuff on philosophy and theology is generally terrible.The sort of atheist that never actually looks into theology but knows the thing that first came to her head is a definitely the most amazing point against classical theology that has never been considered before.
> mathematicians or physicists fall into this category of knowing a lot about many thing . Sabine videos for example . she knows everything it seems
Sabine Hossenfelder, for obvious reasons, knows quite a bit about physics, though on some physics topics she has opinions that are outside the mainstream. For other areas, I am rather certain that she has a talent to learn about them up to some shallow level quite fast, which suffices to create some video about the respective topic, and then move on.
It turned out she had more talent for being a science influencer than a scientist.
Sabine is a crank who likes to wax poetically about fields she has no creds in.
She is a grifter, not crank.