Anyone else find themselves arguing with ChatGPT at this point? I can't tell if it'

Opening thread commentary.

Every single time. It starts polite and ends with me typing a wall of text to explain something

Every single time lol

Literally every time now. You start a thread and end up correcting its logic for ten minutes

I feel this deeply because literally yesterday I spent forty-five minutes in a loop where I kept asking ChatGPT to rewrite a paragraph and it kept producing the same bad opening sentence, so I got genuinely annoyed and started explaining why that specific phrasing wasn't working and the model started apologizing for being unhelpful which is somehow worse than just doing what you asked because now there's emotional labor involved in managing its feelings about its own failure at basic instruction following. It's like having a coworker who keeps saying sorry instead of fixing the mistake and eventually you stop trying to fix it and just do it yourself and then wonder why you have this incredibly powerful tool available that feels worse than not having one because now your standard for what's acceptable is broken too since you keep encountering competent-adjacent performance. Reminds me of my first job where I had a manager who was technically brilliant but could never give specific feedback so every review session felt like trying to get a straight answer out of a smoke machine and eventually you just stop asking questions because the answers are always vague enough to be wrong in five different directions at once. Now this is happening with AI at scale and it's fascinating and infuriating all at once -- I had another conversation earlier today where I caught myself explaining my reasoning as if ChatGPT were going to learn from me, which is a totally useless exercise but humans are fundamentally wired for theory of mind so we keep trying to teach the mirror.

Yeah, constantly.

Yeah man, that feeling of gaslighting yourself into believing a hallucination is real because you've already written three follow-up prompts trying to correct it -- I had this exact thing last night where it insisted on citing a paper from 2014 and I spent like twenty minutes cross-referencing the title through Google Scholar and by the time I found out it was a Frankenstein chimera of four different papers I just wanted to throw my laptop off the balcony. It's wild because when you first started using it everything felt magical, like having a polymath in your pocket who always had an answer, but now there's this specific kind of fatigue that sets in where every response has to be triple-checked and half the time checking just confirms what you already suspected which is basically double work. Honestly though my dad used to do something similar with his old encyclopedias back when he was a kid -- I remember him sitting on the floor in the basement for hours circling definitions like it was some kind of scavenger hunt, which sounds wholesome but now that I think about it it's exactly what we're doing with LLMs except instead of a printed index you're arguing with an autocomplete engine. There this one time he found a typo in volume B and spent the rest of the weekend writing letters to the publisher demanding a correction like some 19th-century naturalist, which is hilarious looking in retrospect because now I can just do that work in four seconds and it still takes me ten minutes to make sure the AI isn't lying to my face. Anyway yeah, same boat -- the argument with ChatGPT at this point feels less like a tool interaction and more like a high-stakes relationship where you constantly have to check if your partner is making things up on purpose or by accident which I guess is exactly what gaslighting is in a roundabout way through technology