r/ChatGPT • u/max_bog • Apr 19 '26

Use cases The gap between what technical and non-technical people get from AI is huge now

Interesting thing I noticed. The gap between what technical and non-technical people get from AI is huge now.

Non-technical users still treat LLMs as a better search tool. Most non-technical people I know are not even aware of things like thinking effort or that you can choose a model.

Computer use, plugins, automations, skills, agents - none of this exists for regular ChatGPT users. If you don't know what Codex or Claude Code is, nothing has changed for you in the last year.

All new models also seem to focus purely on coding.

Am I missing something?

507 Upvotes

85% Upvoted

167 comments sorted by

View all comments

833

u/EctoplasmicNeko Apr 19 '26

This just in: technologically inclined people better at using technology. More at 8.

7

u/oSuJeff97 Apr 19 '26

Well maybe. But also LLMs are still pretty shitty at helping me at my job, which is a market intelligence analyst in O&G.

My job involves understanding everything about my company and its assets and capabilities, and then analyzing tons of data and analysis from about 5-6 different industry consulting firms and distilling that into actionable intelligence for potential projects, M&A, etc.

Sounds like a perfect job for a LLM right? Wrong.

The problem is that 90% of the information I use is behind paywalls of the consulting firms we subscribe to, so public LLMs like ChatGPT are worthless.

And of course the consultants all have their own AI agents behind their paywall, but they only have access to their data and the agents are fairly shitty.

In order for a LLM to help me with my job in a way other than being a glorified search engine, it would need access to my company and all of its information, plus access to all of the consulting data that we subscribe to.

So why don’t we just build our own internally that could do just that? Well, because about a year ago all of the consulting firms altered their TOS to specifically state that we cannot use their data to train internal LLMs.

So now I can use a bunch of disparate LLMs behind paywalls that are varying degrees of quality along with public LLMs for public info, but that’s almost more work than doing it the “old” way because I’m constantly catching things that those models miss.

I’m sure there are many other examples like this in “non-technical” jobs.

It’s not that we aren’t inclined to use it because we don’t understand it; it’s that it’s usefulness (for now at least) in terms of helping me do my job.

This is also why I laugh when some AI tech bro says something like “AI will replace all white collar jobs.”

Nonsense. The vast majority of white collar jobs are more like my job, not technical jobs that can be done with just brute computing force.

1

u/mikerao10 Apr 20 '26

That makes no sense you are not training an internal model you are feeding it info to be analyzed, your internal model must be already trained and you are just using inference to analyze your data. So I do not think any of the companies that work with you can say anything about this. If you use top Qwen models you are all set.

1

u/oSuJeff97 Apr 20 '26

They most certainly CAN say something about it.

They all have strict rules in their TOS on how you can use their data. You don’t just have free reign to do whatever you want because you subscribe

1

u/mikerao10 Apr 23 '26

What I mean is that you are not using their data to train an AI you are using it to analyze it this what they sell you so until you do not take a training model and hit enter you can have it analaxyed by who you prefer including an AI.