That’s the obvious answer to your question of why not go closer to the original source. Reading a whole book to resolve questions of fact is spectacularly inefficient unless those facts are cruxes for crucial decisions.
I wonder if this is one good use of LLM’s encyclopedic knowledge. Asking an LLM if there are contradictory accounts to claims of fact would be many orders of magnitude more efficient than reading source books.
Time.
That’s the obvious answer to your question of why not go closer to the original source. Reading a whole book to resolve questions of fact is spectacularly inefficient unless those facts are cruxes for crucial decisions.
I wonder if this is one good use of LLM’s encyclopedic knowledge. Asking an LLM if there are contradictory accounts to claims of fact would be many orders of magnitude more efficient than reading source books.