Comment by abecedarius

If you consider it a mistake to say the word 'teaching' to describe explaining a new topic in natural language, asking my counterparty to solve problems, explaining errors and wrong assumptions in some of its responses, and getting corrected answers back, with the new information incorporated into subsequent answers -- this is just not a conversation worth having. Yes, of course I know it's freshly reset in new conversations. And of course I know that its mechanisms and the spectrum of strengths and weaknesses are not human-like.

When you tell me what I allegedly think and under what condition I'd be "more skeptical", it's kind of irritating. (Maybe I deserve it for starting this thread with a combative tone. By the time I came back meaning to edit that first comment, there was already a reply.)