← Back to context Comment by zparky 15 days ago I mean, you both used the exact same prompt, how is OP 'holding it worng'? 3 comments zparky Reply denysvitali 15 days ago Granted that we can't see which model was picked, but one clearly shows that thinking was enabled, the other shows it's not.This just proves the article's point about using cheap models / free versions and complaining about the state of AI.Well done! hbjkhgkytfkytv 15 days ago It was GPT 5.2. Can't remember if I did thinking or not. Note that even after the fallacy was highlighted to the model, it seemed to have a tough time grasping what went wrong. hackable_sand 13 days ago You are proud about baking classism into your little toy?Disgusting
denysvitali 15 days ago Granted that we can't see which model was picked, but one clearly shows that thinking was enabled, the other shows it's not.This just proves the article's point about using cheap models / free versions and complaining about the state of AI.Well done! hbjkhgkytfkytv 15 days ago It was GPT 5.2. Can't remember if I did thinking or not. Note that even after the fallacy was highlighted to the model, it seemed to have a tough time grasping what went wrong. hackable_sand 13 days ago You are proud about baking classism into your little toy?Disgusting
hbjkhgkytfkytv 15 days ago It was GPT 5.2. Can't remember if I did thinking or not. Note that even after the fallacy was highlighted to the model, it seemed to have a tough time grasping what went wrong.
Granted that we can't see which model was picked, but one clearly shows that thinking was enabled, the other shows it's not.
This just proves the article's point about using cheap models / free versions and complaining about the state of AI.
Well done!
It was GPT 5.2. Can't remember if I did thinking or not. Note that even after the fallacy was highlighted to the model, it seemed to have a tough time grasping what went wrong.
You are proud about baking classism into your little toy?
Disgusting