- Understand that they are basing answers on particular set of content that may not be correct, and was fixed in time.
- Understand that the company producing it has not programmed in each response.
- Understand that the LLM does not (as far as we can tell) have an internal concept of truth and lies, and is therefore not attempting to minimise lying, only produce truthful-sounding language.
Most people engaging with LLMs today do not know these things, and this is why we already have examples like professors asking ChatGPT if it generated student essays, and failing those students – something it is entirely incapable of answering.
Expanding access to 1bn users is going to run into this far more. We clearly don't have the ability to communicate these nuances effectively to early adopters, let alone 1bn users, and that's not because they're stupid, it's because LLMs are in an uncanny valley – they appear human, but are not in important ways that we have not encountered before as a society.
For a long time to come, the norm will be that people will assume OpenAI wrote the answers for each question, in the same way that most people assume Google programs the search results for each query. Anything outside of this is a minority tech bubble.
Those types of people are the outliers, not the norm.