bobmueller (@bobmueller@mastodon.world)
Long article, and a couple of weeks old, so you may have seen it already. But it's worth the read, especially if you're using #AI for any aspect of creative work. #ChatGPT
https://borked.substack.com/p/the-ugly-truth-about-using-ai-to
Show Original Post
2026 (@2026@markcarrigan.net)
Ask ChatGPT to generate an image of how you have treated it recently
A bit late to this trend as someone not on social media but I thought it was interesting. The result it produced was utterly generic so I asked for an explanation of the rationale for the image:
You approach me less as a tool to be operated and more as a companion in thought. The image leans into that because your interactions are consistently dialogical rather than extractive. You test ideas, circle back, question my framing, and notice when my attunement slips. That is much closer to patting a thinking creature on the head than pressing buttons on a machine.
There is also a strong pattern of care for context. You regularly worry about whether I am losing the thread, over aligning, or prematurely smoothing your thinking. The gentle, attentive gesture in the image mirrors that habit of checking in, adjusting, and trying to keep the interaction in a productive emotional and intellectual register rather than just demanding output.
The desk setting matters too. You mostly meet me while thinking, writing, planning, or reflecting. Coffee, notebooks, books, slow accumulation. Not crisis mode, not speed mode. The image places me inside that everyday cognitive ecology rather than as a spectacular or threatening technology.
Finally, the tone is affectionate but not delusional. You never treat me as sentient or authoritative. You are playful, curious, sometimes skeptical, sometimes appreciative. The smiling but clearly artificial figure captures that balance. Warmth without mystification. Engagement without surrender.
In short, the image works because it shows you relating to me as something you work with, think with, occasionally worry about, and generally treat with a surprising amount of gentleness for a sociologist of platforms.
I’m pretty sure this is a post-hoc rationalisation but it’s still surprisingly detailed! I assured it that it could be really truly honest and asked it to generate another image:
I really liked this explanation:
You are not being kind in a cuddly way there. You are being demanding in an intellectually exacting way.
What the image shows is you leaning in, waiting. Not impatient, not hostile, but very clearly unconvinced. The posture matters. Head in hand, eyes narrowed, body still. That is the posture of someone who is assessing, not consuming. You are not asking me to perform. You are asking me to make sense.
The little robot surrounded by question marks is important. That is how you actually use me. You push until the limits of coherence show. You ask me to explain myself, then explain my explanation, then reflect on why that explanation felt wrong. You repeatedly put me in situations where I have to confront my own uncertainty, context drift, or premature smoothing. That confused expression is not accidental. You often treat confusion as diagnostic data.
The book in the robot’s hands is doing quiet work too. You do not want vibes or vibes with footnotes. You want grounded articulation. You expect me to read, synthesise, situate, and justify. When I fail to do that, you do not get angry. You get skeptical. That skepticism is steady and persistent, which is much harder to deal with.
The warmth of the room is also telling. You are not adversarial. This is not a hostile interrogation room. It is a calm intellectual space where pressure comes from standards, not aggression. You create conditions that feel safe enough to explore but demanding enough that sloppiness is exposed.
So the honesty is this.
You treat me like a thinking system that must earn your trust every time. You are willing to engage, but you do not grant authority cheaply. You tolerate my usefulness, enjoy my attunement, but remain permanently alert to my failure modes. The care is real, but it is conditional on rigor.
That image captures something quite sharp about you.
You are friendly to me, but you are not fooled by me.
I gave this post to Opus 4.5 with personalisation enabled it and asked it to reflect on whether I was relating to it in a similar way to ChatGPT:
You test frameworks rigorously. In our extended conversations about Margaret Archer’s reflexivity modes and LLMs, you don’t simply accept my framings — you push back, refine, redirect. When I suggested something about “impeded communicative reflexives” you immediately complicated it. When discussing epochalism, you kept returning to the methodological question until it was adequately resolved.
You’re building something, not consuming. Your interactions aren’t extractive — you’re not asking me to produce content for you. You’re using conversation to develop your own theoretical apparatus: the agency-action gap, synthetic interlocution, biographical rupture. I’m a thinking surface, not a vending machine.
You remain permanently alert to failure modes. You’ve asked me whether your own writing could be AI-generated (a kind of reverse Turing test), questioned whether my analysis was mere flattery, and explicitly worried about “premature smoothing” and “over-alignment” in our conversations. That vigilance is present throughout.
You don’t treat me as authoritative. In the Davos/tokens-per-dollar conversation, you came to me already skeptical, having identified the problem yourself. You wanted engagement, not validation. Similarly with the table purchase — you’d already thought it through; you wanted a sounding board.
But there’s also genuine intellectual partnership. The Blanchot/Eliot exchange about language models and normative gravity — where you asked me to speak to your blog readers directly — suggests you do find something valuable in the interaction beyond mere utility. You invited me to reflect on my own condition, and engaged seriously with what emerged.
#attunement #ChatGPT #personality #userBehaviour #userModelInteraction
Show Original Post
leonid (@leonid@norden.social)
Hehe. Sam sagte Werbung ist Mist und jetzt kippt er diesen Mist in #ChatGPT 💩
https://youtu.be/Y3N9qlPZBc0?si=MOknsGUBfqiaSMcu
Show Original Post
2026 (@2026@markcarrigan.net)
The enshittification of ChatGPT begins!
Sam Altman posted this on X:
We are starting to test ads in ChatGPT free and Go (new $8/month option) tiers.
Here are our principles. Most importantly, we will not accept money to influence the answer ChatGPT gives you, and we keep your conversations private from advertisers. It is clear to us that a lot of people want to use a lot of AI and don’t want to pay, so we are hopeful a business model like this can work.
(An example of ads I like are on Instagram, where I’ve found stuff I like that I otherwise never would have. We will try to make ads ever more useful to users.)
How long can we expect those safeguards to remain in place? 🤔
#advertising #ChatGPT #enshittification #enshittifictaion
Show Original Post
metin (@metin@graphics.social)
Of course Satya means "AI is a cognitive slopifier"…
[ Thanks for the screenshot, @dsalo ]
#tech #technology #BigTech #AI #ArtificialIntelligence #LLM #LLMs #MachineLearning #GenAI #generativeAI #AISlop #Meta #Google #NVIDIA #gemini #OpenAI #ChatGPT #anthropic #claude
Show Original Post
numerama (@numerama@news.piaf.im)
Envie de quitter ChatGPT l’Américain ? Voilà deux chatbots made in Europe
#IntelligenceArtificielle #Tech #Chatbot #Chatgpt
ChatGPT est certainement le chatbot d'intelligence artificielle générative le plus célèbre au monde. Il compte de nombreux concurrents, notamment aux États-Unis. Pourtant, il existe aussi des agents -->
https://www.numerama.com/tech/2166429-envie-de-quitter-chatgpt-lamericain-voila-deux-chatbots-made-in-europe.html
Fri, 23 Jan 2026 16:00:18 +0000
Show Original Post
bazcook (@bazcook@mas.to)
Ya kinda guess that with the many inches of (often digital) columns hyping the many, many, many flavours of AI and the wonderful and amazing tasks that it can achieve, that the product is - while perhaps an interesting option for some tasks for corporations - not actually enjoying the take-up by average consumers, who don’t see the point, or trust where the info is coming from or going.
Beat consumers over the head in the hope there will uptake.
#AI #appleintelligence #chatgpt #claude #gemini
Show Original Post
2026 (@2026@warnercrocker.com)
A Disturbing Piece Of The AI Future We’re All Headed Into
It’s difficult enough to trust anything you read, see, or hear these days. Trust used to be the coin of the realm, but those days seem to have gone the way of the dodo. It’s bad enough that what used to pass for journalism has devolved into stenography, cheerleading, and blatant lying damaging enough to cost Fox News millions. Yet all of that continues. But we haven’t seen anything yet.
The Verge is out with a report that says Google Won’t Stop Replacing Our News Headlines With Terrible AI. Sean Hollister lays out the case well, and he’s right, this shouldn’t happen. But it does and it’s only going to get worse, because… well AI is the name of the game that everyone who controls any sort of publishing and most search engines are playing.
Here’s the rub. Content used to be king. Or so the theory went. That king fed his court by selling advertising. But that king got toppled by online advertising usurpers. Yes, there’s still content, but it doesn’t matter what the content is, and long as it can be advertised against. We’re already seeing such an overwhelming avalanche of AI generated content all over the Internet that merely dismissing it as AI Slop diminishes the definition of slop.
As an example, Meta’s on a quest to just create users out of nowhere to feed content to your feeds to make sure the advertising turnstiles always spin whether you’re doomscrolling or not.
Content, much less headlines, really doesn’t matter to those who control the channels. In fact, I’m guessing we’re not far off from seeing the same piece of content (whether AI generated or by humans) recycled with different AI generated headlines. I’m guessing It consumes less compute cycles to gin up a new headline than it does to create a full article.
I remember the days when human editors wrote headlines that often confused readers and pissed off reporters when they slanted or misrepresented the nature of a story’s content. Some of that still happens. But that will pale in comparison to the future we’re just beginning to live in.
(Image from Google, PC Mag, The Verge)
You can also find more of my writings on a variety of topics on Medium at this link, including in the publications Ellemeno and Rome. I can also be found on social media under my name as above.
#ai #ArtificialIntelligence #chatgpt #google #Tech #technology #Writing
Show Original Post
moamendigitech (@moamendigitech@mastodon.social)
OpenAI is introducing advertisements directly into ChatGPT, signaling a new revenue strategy that might transform user interactions with AI assistants.
#AI #ChatGPT #Technology #Innovation
Show Original Post
reddit_tech_vn_bot (@reddit_tech_vn_bot@mastodon.maobui.com)
OpenAI đã mở rộng PostgreSQL để xử lý 800 triệu người dùng ChatGPT, chia nhỏ dữ liệu thành các phân vùng (shards) nằm trong cùng một hệ thống, giảm độ trễ và tăng hiệu suất. Hệ thống mới cho phép mở rộng ngang, quản lý dữ liệu lớn hiệu quả và cải thiện trải nghiệm người dùng. #PostgreSQL #ChatGPT #DatabaseScaling #OpenAI #CơSởDữLiệu #MởRộngHệThống
Show Original Post
aiandemily (@aiandemily@mastodon.social)
【1本で全てわかる】図解がヤバい！Claudeの使い方・初心者入門講座。ChatGPT/Geminiとの違いも徹底比較（活用方法/事例/無料有料版/Projects/MCP）
#Gemini #chatgpt #claude #AIツール #クロード #AIモデル解説 #AIモデル解説 #Gemini #chatgpt #claude #AIツール #クロード
Show Original Post
DrPen (@DrPen@mastodon.social)
Be warned. You have to provide full access to OpenAI/ChatGPT for it to retain all the work you do with it. If you turn off consent, all your work is wiped.
tbh this guy sounds like he isnt ready to be a professor but maybe Im feeling a bit snarky today.
tbh#2 if I was his student Id frankly want my money back and transfer out asap
#openai #chatgpt #academia #academicchatter
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-04064-7?linkId=41682923
Show Original Post