You can't put much faith in screenshots or chatgpt share-links: https://chatgpt.com/share/680ed17d-fca4-800f-93e2-38b3ff2da4... / https://chatgpt.com/share/680ed088-5f74-800f-8b7b-f12948fa9e...

A nightmare scenario for LLMs is becoming another dealer of cheap dopamine hits, using your personal history, your anxieties, and whatever else it can infer from you to keep you hooked.

s/nightmare scenario/only possible route to justify the multibillion valuation/

Not just a danger for interpersonal relationships, it will enable everyone in a management structure to surround themselves with perfect yes-men.

Zuckerberg already on it

Isn't it already one and that's why anyone uses it?

And how would you possibly believe that!

If it had access to its own settings, and it wasn’t making things up, and it wasn’t lying… but why would it be trained on any of these things?

Because I would test if it's keeping its word, like periodically or spontaneously asking both whether it can _import_ the context from one chat to another or, judging the conversational flow between topics.

You’re attributing consistency and theory of mind to something that has neither. It will say yes sometimes, despite not being able to do so!

Maybe we're on different wavelengths on this issue but practically speaking, it hasn't spilled or splattered contexts from different chat topics.. yet.

I'm seeing so many complains that 4o became a yes man, but I wonder if anyone ever used Gemini. What an egregiously sycophant persona. Users are blasted with infantile positive reinforcements just by posting a damn prompt.

It's customer service speak