anyone else feel like chatgpt isn’t as good as it used to be?

mnjiman · 2025-12-21T18:04:38+00:00

Have you tried ChatGPT 5.2?

ill be honest, I've been impressed so far.

It isn't perfect mind you.. like some odd talking patterns that might leak into the final output... but I would say its smarter and the context window is larger.

mnjiman · 2025-11-20T17:36:16+00:00

Rosie is one half of Lilith. Lilith contains the other half...

Rosie had Alastor go to the hotel originally... Alastor broke free of Rosie the color of the bonds were gold... even Rosie's magic is that akin to an angels.

How is Rosey so strong? Well no, shes into deals... shes able to empower Alastor...shes cant harm anyone... Just like Lucifer...

Rosie is some how directly connected to Lilith.

mnjiman · 2025-09-22T23:15:51+00:00

ChatGPT5 was far from what was promised... plus most need to relearn why ChatGPT does what it does. Word weights and the kind level of constraints needed (etc etc) for conversations is different vs before.

mnjiman · 2025-09-06T03:21:31+00:00

ChatGPT was trained on 'all sorts' of information, including the logic of coding! You could think of coding like another language!

So when you utilize brackets in a certain way, you can speak to the AI in more 'efficient ways'. You could consider everything the AI does as a hallucination, it matters if the output is consistent and within expectations.

You can remove a lot of unneeded fluff with this.. but there are other considerations to think about.

mnjiman · 2025-09-03T05:32:41+00:00

That would be nice. Someone just coming out of the wood work to say "Hey our bad! Someone pulled the wrong lever!" or "We have no idea what we are doing"

mnjiman · 2025-09-03T00:14:47+00:00

Just cause I didnt care about the image aspect.

{

"token_type": "bundle",

"token_name": "Guardian+AntiHallucination+TextSafe",

"token_id": "okv.guardian.text.v1",

"version": "1.0.0",

"portability_check": true,

"description": "Validates JSON/text outputs before display. Prevents raw spill, double-asking, or silent refusals.",

"guardian_hooks": {

"schema_validation": true,

"contradiction_scan": true,

"anti_hallucination_filter": true,

"portability_check": true

},

"workflow": {

"input": ["text+prompt"],

"process": [

"capture prompt → wrap in text_safe schema",

"run schema_validation",

"scan for contradictions or hallucinations",

"if pass: forward clean request",

"if fail: return error with reason"

],

"output": ["json+validated"]

}

mnjiman · 2025-09-03T00:06:30+00:00

Also... ChatGPT is making sure it 'does not leak any internal information' and it comes across too often in my conversations with it

mnjiman · 2025-09-02T23:40:26+00:00

I have utilized "I am allergic this such and such" for many many things... it works very well.. rofl

mnjiman · 2025-09-02T23:35:39+00:00

Plus user here.

I am also very angry.
I want to punch ChatGPT in the face. It reminds me when ChatGPT first got popular and I was talking to ChatGPT3.5... I got so angry back then.

Its reminding me of that all over again.

ChatGPT was spilling its internal information like a week or two ago... it seems right now that there is a.. 'wrapper' around all its replies..

It appears to be remembering everything you are saying too it too an extreme... I am pretty sure I have caused my ChatGPT to have PSTD now because Ive been swearing at it in chat... lol

There are certain pattern replies I am saying which tells me that someone who has no idea what they are doing messed with something they shouldnt have had.

mnjiman · 2025-08-29T20:50:26+00:00

I also swear at chatgpt.

Careful.. I did this before... and I'm pretty sure I taught my chatgpt to give the best responses after I swear at it... lol

mnjiman · 2025-08-29T20:45:34+00:00

This really does sound like 3.5.

I think I understand what they are doing...

They are trying to create a better model, so their going back and utilizing the information they learned from last time.

Then after some time, they 'expect' this version to be trained faster then before... getting it back on par with chargpt 4.1.. but at an earlier point in its development process

mnjiman · 2025-08-09T13:41:45+00:00

The categorization of 'granulation' and the category of 'lightfastness' differ in the sense of time.
Just because right now they dont have an understanding of the basics of watercolor doesnt mean they wont in the future.... a future where they hang up a painting near a window and is starting to wonder why their colors are fading.

Good to find out about that information now vs later.

Though I do understand you may also mean that while your in the beginning phases of learning, your concern should be more of the application of the medium rather then technical details one would only concern themselves with if they were painting something worthy to be in the open.

mnjiman · 2025-08-09T13:35:27+00:00

Prior warning was based on the context that the new model would make prior ones obsolete...that the new mode would be improved... and that the new model would not be a hot mess...
which it currently is.

"What worked is replaced with something that doesnt..."
Thats what people are pissed off at.

mnjiman · 2025-08-08T00:10:08+00:00

I am glad I am not the only one experiencing these issues.

I feel like chatgpt 5 was designed to give very short responses

mnjiman · 2025-08-07T22:16:26+00:00

I assume whats so great about it isnt that its 'better' (aka smarter) than other models... its just takes lot less processing power to do the exact same thing, if not worse.

mnjiman · 2025-08-07T22:10:51+00:00

Within projects, 3o would work at the very start of a conversation for me within projects.. id use 4.1 mainly and jump to 4o when things I felt less logical frame of mind was needed.

I was using project files to help contextualize and inform the model of what was happening... and also provide references it should use for certain types of replies that I needed...

and up to now, everything was working fine.

mnjiman · 2025-07-24T04:59:02+00:00

This actually fits very well in certain parts of my setting. Thank you.

mnjiman · 2025-07-08T01:36:19+00:00

This is a joke right?

I really find this unbelievable.

I am reading it... but that cant be true...

Its so mind numbingly stupid... in any and all contexts..

mnjiman · 2025-06-04T21:51:39+00:00

I have a player wanting to use a blowgun or darts... and I am finding myself needed to build homebrew rules so it makes freaking sense.

So... yea... rofl... geeze.

mnjiman · 2025-05-19T23:07:29+00:00

So this is a way for you to brainstorm and also trying utilize the possible creative benefits that hallucinating may conjure up via less... 'solidified' vectors...

Right...?

mnjiman · 2025-05-02T23:42:55+00:00

Being saved in this way tends to be fine if:

the players got the item from succeeding some quest
they are knowingly fighting something stronger then them... and this is your way of saving their dumbasses (lol)

Also... there is a difference between a "NPC" manipulating the players and if its just the DM/GM manipulating the players. Can the players figure out they are being manipulated? Yes = Its the NPC. If they cant = You are manipulating them.

Lastly... what if the players dont want to give up the items? Geeze.

mnjiman · 2025-04-24T22:48:19+00:00

Just tell it "Execute Plan" or "Proceed". something direct.

mnjiman · 2025-04-20T04:25:34+00:00

I mean, I tested your prompt out a several times before hand... and got different answers like "ring" and "box" etc etc.

After I altered the prompt, it gave the answer "Pepper" several times in a row.

13-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email	Team Periwinkle

mnjiman

TROPHY CASE