I keep hearing how it is supposed to be a problem that AI is not infallible and when first released it was certainly full of errors although it’s tightened up a good bit since. However, as I have repeated several times, every source of information needs to be double checked and mistakes are made from every source I use. Deductions based on research are changed all the time as research continues and as far as anecdotal observations often served up as fact by forum members, all of us sometimes succumb to mistaking correlation for cause and exaggerate the significance of our own anecdotal observations. .
Members can fact check any source and should do so, but I do not believe that the objection to AI derived info is based on its level of accuracy and I believe the negativity to an info source that delivers answers instantly, methodically and coherently to be an impediment to teaching about fruit tree management.
For the record, this is not the primary cause of my withdrawing from forum participation. It has more to do with actively participating in this forum at a high level for over a decade and finding myself answering the same questions again and again for lack of a functional search engine. My son has volunteered to vastly improve it, although I cannot be certain of his follow through if it would take him more than a weekend. His speed is apparently exceptional, but I know nothing of that world or what effort would be required to essentially rebuild the feeble search engine here.
That makes a little more sense. Thanks for the explanation. I was tempted to express some skepticism that you were disengaging from the forum, but decided it better to not add an additional hurdle to your potential future resumption of participation.
It would seem ChatGPT and the Perplexity AI differ a fair bit in their recommendations, so apparently all AI’s are not created equal. I am not going to post Perplexity AI’s recommendations, because anyone wishing to know that information can easily search for it themselves.
It is also interesting to note the fact that ChatGPT provided the application amounts per sq ft or acre, but no schedule as to the frequency of applications. Is the rate ChatGPT recommends on an annual basis? Perplexity AI did provide a timetable for the amount to apply every 3 years, ChatGPT provided zero guidance in this respect.
So who is to be trusted?
I think I’ll go with Washington State University’s recommendations over any AI’s, as I live in the PNW:
All you have to do is ask. Once again, it is like DA’s trying to get a guilty verdict of an innocent citizen. I have nothing against university guidelines and this is not and either or proposition to begin with.
I could easily make an extended case against university guidelines which have often misguided me in my 30+ years of managing orchards as a full time occupation. However, they are also often very useful, just as is Chat. This is why you bring information to a forum, hopefully to be discussed by people with a range of experiences.
My opinion is that there is tremendous emotional backlash against using AI as an info source and, so far, no one has posted an argument I find at all convincing to contradict my opinion. Of course, people rarely admit to having emotional bias- probably not even to themselves. Lately my concern about this tendency has been vastly accelerating and finding it so prevalent on this forum makes me want to turn away from it. I am trying not to be constantly reminded.
How frequently should reapplication occur
ChatGPT said:
The frequency of boron reapplication in an apple orchard depends on soil type, rainfall, and monitoring through soil and leaf tissue tests. General guidelines:
1. Soil Applications
Heavy soils (clay, loam): Every 2–3 years, as boron binds to soil particles and leaches slowly.
Light soils (sandy, low organic matter):Annually in small doses due to higher leaching risk.
Split applications (e.g., spring and post-harvest) can help maintain availability without overloading.
Pre-bloom (tight cluster to pink stage) – Enhances fruit set and pollen viability. * Post-harvest (late summer to early fall) – Helps replenish boron reserves for the next season.
Additional sprays mid-season may be needed if deficiency symptoms appear.
Monitoring & Adjusting
Use leaf tissue analysis (20–60 ppm ideal mid-season) and soil tests to guide application timing.
If boron levels drop below 20 ppm in leaves, reapply sooner.
If levels are high (above 60 ppm), reduce or skip applications to avoid toxicity.
For precision, it’s best to adjust based on annual leaf tissue tests rather than applying on a fixed schedule.
Maybe they could be organized as a categorized faq(?)
I think the last sentence is the most important. Especially for amendments which are potentially toxic, soil and or tissue samples are important. I added a case of borax to 3 acres. I will only add more based on tissue sample analysis starting in a couple years.
I use this forum because I like to read the members personnel experience.
AI is easy to use so any question can be easily asked on ChatGPT, Gemini, DeepSeak, Copilot, Perplexity and others rather than here. Best to try a few since the answers are not always the same and sometimes very different.
My concern is that as AI becomes more popular and more of it is posted here users will skip going to GrowingFruit and just go directly to AI resulting in a loss of useful information directly from growers like Alan and others.
I like the AI assisted content when it is posted with context, and isn’t a flood that overwhelms the discussion, which you’ve been good about doing.
When its clear why its relevant to the discussion, the search terms shared, and the result scrutinized before posting.
I hate the implementation in places like Amazon reviews, or Google search where they are put in the fore and take the place of what I was looking for. In Google I just have to remember to scroll past. On Amazon I have to jump through hoops to get past it.
Yes, and guidelines are incorporated into discussions here without member protest. There is not heavy prevalence of such guidelines crowding out experiences of members, and there has never been a demonstrated threat of AI crowding it out either. And yet people still reacted with a great deal of negative passion about AI and not other things just as capable of replacing shared experiences that have always been a part of forum discussion.
AI is not easy to use, as I’ve demonstrated on several occasions, including the above. An expert may know many of the questions to ask, but most members here come without enough background to be able to affectively use Chat. They might be misled because they believe their question is thorough when it isn’t.
I am very experienced in caring for fruit trees but its a very complex business and I often will refresh my knowledge on some specific issue by asking Chat. The knowledge on this subject floating in my brain is encyclopedic- if only I could edit the thing with AI. Actually, that’s what I sometimes have it do.
Where I have run into a bit of trouble here with Chat is when using it to answer a question I am not knowledgeable about, but I’ve learned that lesson.
AI is like GMO in this regard. There’s great potential from the technologies to make lives better or worse. With lots of prejudices and the initial commercial uses are pretty crap ambassadors.