Sure, you have to take all the answers with a grain of salt. But code is one area I can verify myself, so I’m less worried.

So, it's really easy to learn but you already have to know what you're allegedly learning to be able to call bs on the parts that are fake?

How is this helpful?

That level of skepticism is the reality for any query to a human or a search engine. For example, maybe that first search result is correct, but for the wrong version of what you are looking for. Maybe your colleague didn't understand what you really wanted.

Where it is helpful is that it's way more convenient than asking a human, doing a web search, or looking it up in a book. Even if a followup question is required. In this particular case there is a lot of transferability between knowing programming languages, too, so one can filter most implausible answers even if they don't know the programming language they are asking about.

As they unify the "web browsing" capabilities with the LLM using its own internal knowledge, it gets interesting because how can the LLM even decide if its own knowledge is accurate or superior or not?

so, they now adding few more steps into the chain, each of each has its own quality issues, and we yet to see what will be final quality.