← Back to context

Comment by simoncion

6 hours ago

Neat.

So, despite the fact that it looks like you have to pay for ChatGPT Voice mode with video, [0] it doesn't count as an

  example of it bullshitting on ChatGPT (paid version)

That is, father_phi's use of what seems to be a paid version of ChatGPT to have a bullshit-filled conversation that definitely spans less than four pages doesn't count?

[0] The page at [1] declares that the video feature is "Available in ChatGPT Plus, Pro, Business, Enterprise, and Edu on mobile"

[1] <https://chatgpt.com/features/voice-with-video/>

Lets stick to my challenge please - thinking version, find bullshit. If you can't, thats ok. Do you accept then under the constraints that the thinking version doesn't produce bullshit?

  • Given aphyr's vocation (and how very lucrative it is), and how years and years of his writing indicates that he's very devoted to getting a correct and complete answer when investigating a question, I find it hard to believe that he's not using a paid version of the LLMs. If I knew him, I'd ask and verify, but I don't, so I won't.

    > Lets stick to my challenge please...

    I did. Your challenge was literally:

      If it bullshits so much, you wouldn't have a problem giving me an example of it bullshitting on ChatGPT (paid version)? Lets take any example of a text prompt fitting a few pages - it may be a question in science or math or any domain. Can you get it to bullshit?
    

    father_phi's two-sentence question about the whether one can use a cup that's closed at the top and open at the bottom definitely counts. Given what I've mentioned about apyhr above, I expect he has already run your challenge on the fanciest-available version and reported on the results in the essay under discussion.

    • > Use the thinking version gpt5.4 (text) and tell me if it bullshits

      This was what I said. Text! Despite me specifically asking for text, you've shown a voice example. Not sure why?

      I believe you and I agree that GPT 5.4 thinking on text that fits < 4 pages never bullshits? Then we are good!

      If we agree on this, I think the post doesn't capture this in spirit.

      10 replies →