Human problem, not ChatGPT-4 problem. People notoriously have rose-tinted glasses with their memories. ChatGPT has always been imperfect, but now there's a something of a mild hysteria (sort of like sick building syndrome) that it's gotten worse. It hasn't.
Case in point: nobody can provide evidence that it's gotten worse, even though chat logs are superabundant, and providing evidence should be trivial.
But for those who put stock in anecdotes: I use it heavily, and it seems the same to me! When I first got access, I began with testing its limits, and it has always had sharp ones. It's still a lovely tool for a lot of tasks, but the honeymoon period is apparently over for some people.
I don't know how others' workflow goes, but when GPT fucks up enough, I have a habit of nuking the conversation and starting a new one so the failures don't pollute my history.
There is also an information asymmetry involved in refuting the internals of a black box. We can't prove shit because we don't have visibility into the tech stack, but you can't prove we're all delusional either. We can at least point to generations of jailbreaks spontaneously ceasing to work at the same time the company insists they've changed nothing. They're either lying or fucking around with something that has attained sentience.
We're all arguing about the existence of a literal deus ex machina. Burden of proof isn't really possible in theological disputes.
Case in point: nobody can provide evidence that it's gotten worse, even though chat logs are superabundant, and providing evidence should be trivial.
But for those who put stock in anecdotes: I use it heavily, and it seems the same to me! When I first got access, I began with testing its limits, and it has always had sharp ones. It's still a lovely tool for a lot of tasks, but the honeymoon period is apparently over for some people.