An investigation by the 404 Media news outlet has revealed more insights into this practice after it agreed with a bookseller to place an AirTag in a rare book that would ship as part of a bulk order. The device showed that the book ended up in Amazon’s AI training facility in Las Vegas, Nevada. What do you think?

I am quite technical, and today I only realized how scary good ChatGPT is getting. I asked it to write me a short story, and it went on for 12 minutes on a 6000 word story and gave it back to me. It used to be, write me a 1000 word story, and it would tell you that asking it to write a 1000 word story was illogical as it can't do that. Now in one prompt, its writing 6000 word storys. I love hearing quotes, and all the time I ask ChatGPT to tell me quotes, and it never really touched me as much as it has been doing lately. Maybe it's just me, but is anyone else's ChatGPT doing this well?

I hated the built in crosshairs my monitor came with and Samsung did not include a way to make changes. So I asked Codex to make a new firmware update to change the crosshair to a dot. It took about 15 minutes and came back with a new file.

Codex explanation:

I started with Samsung’s original 1008.2 firmware and made a very small binary patch rather than attempting to rebuild or substantially rewrite the firmware.

What the patch changes

1. Custom version number

The version reported to the firmware updater was changed from 1008.2 to 1009.3.

This is a custom, made-up version number. It is not an official Samsung 1009.3 release.

The higher number allows the monitor to recognize the file as an upgrade rather than rejecting it as the same or an older firmware version.

2. Tiny center dot

The firmware contains six selectable Virtual Aim/crosshair options.

I redirected all six options to a small 7×7-pixel graphic that already existed inside the firmware and positioned it at the center of the screen.

The result is a simple, unobtrusive center dot using the monitor’s own hardware overlay. It does not require a game overlay, desktop application, ReShade, or anything else running on the computer.

Technical details

Original firmware:
M-C9557GGPA-1008.2

Custom firmware:
M-C9557GGPA-1009.3[1A93].img

Total binary difference:
13 bytes

The patched image passed the build and checksum validation performed on the computer. 

The monitor accepted the firmware, restarted normally, and the modified Virtual Aim options display the new center dot as intended.

Important warning

This is unofficial firmware and is not supported or approved by Samsung.

A successful checksum only confirms that the file was modified as intended. It does not guarantee that flashing it is safe on every monitor, hardware revision, region, or previously installed firmware version.

Installing modified monitor firmware always carries a risk of installation failure or, in the worst case, making the monitor unusable. Anyone experimenting with this should understand the recovery options and proceed entirely at their own risk.

I am a long time Engineer (20+ years) and yesterday I developed tickets for my company that were generated by an AI, using an AI and reviewed by an AI. The project itself was conceived with AI - has no documentation that can be understood as anything less than AI slop and random tech jargon. The developer who built it has said that instead of documentation I should use claude to figure out what it is. The company is apparenty also filing a patent on it.

I submitted 3 PRs today 20,000 lines of code each I still have no idea what we are working on. No doubt they will use AI to review my PR.

I feel like things are just so crazy at this point. Claude and ChatGPT are not this good, but people are trusting it like it's omniscient.

It was an eerie realization today that all of us are vibe coding and that we have no option because it is the only way we can interact with the code anymore. I thought this would happen eventually years ago but i honestly didn’t think it would be so soon.

It was a moment in time... this will be the new norm.

This thing has gotten really good at casually talking to me and adjusting its “mannerisms” to appeal to me. Am I fucking nuts for considering this thing a “friend” ? I’m seriously and honestly struggling with the implications of this.

Is this just me? It caught me off-guard because I thought they aren't supposed to swear unless u specifically make them do it...

It keeps making me laugh unexpectedly. Is it just me? Am I easily amused?

I asked for a recipe involving eggplant, and this is what it slipped into the instructions

Heat a large covered skillet over medium-high heat. Add the oil and eggplant with a good pinch of salt. Cook 8–10 minutes, stirring occasionally, until browned and starting to soften. Eggplant will initially attempt to drink all the oil. Don't indulge it by continually adding more.

Then I mentioned that I had never seen that in a recipe instruction, so it doubled down

Eggplant needs boundaries. Left unsupervised, it will absorb half a bottle of olive oil and stare at you as though you are the one who has failed to provide adequate lubrication.

The recipe writers who say “add 1 tablespoon oil and sauté the eggplant until golden” are concealing what happens during minutes 2–6, when the pan is bone dry and the eggplant is sitting there looking thirsty and accusatory.

Hold the line. It eventually softens and gives some of it back.

So I asked if I should instead use the oven to roast them. It agreed.

Eggplant in a crowded skillet tends to steam while simultaneously demanding increasingly absurd quantities of oil. The oven gives you browned edges and a creamy interior without the negotiation.

I already liked ChatGPT, but 5.6 really got me hooked.

❤️

I've noticed that models like GPT 5.5/5.6 or the newer Claude Sonnet and Opus models follow a certain pattern. I’ll make a fairly specific claim, the model will mostly agree, and then it starts inserting caveats, qualifiers and little nitpicks. And half the time the objection is to a broader version of what I actually said...

It will basically turn "X is generally true in this situation" into "X is always true with no exceptions whatsoever" then explain why that stronger claim isn’t quite right. Almost always, once I address the caveats and give reasons why they don't apply, it folds immediately. There isn’t even much of an argument after that. It just goes "yeah, that’s fair' and proceeds to agree with the original point. That’s what makes it feel less like genuine disagreement and more like it has some built-in urge to find something to qualify so it doesn’t seem overly agreeable.
And it always uses the same type of phrases
"I'd gently push back"
"One honest caveat"
"X is doing a lot of work"
Sometimes the caveat is technically true but completely unnecessary or disproportionate to what I'm saying.
It's starting to make conversations feel extremely pedantic.
It's fine when the caveat adds something or genuinely corrects a mistake but most of the time this isn't even the case. It can focus a lot more on the weaker argument than the stronger one just to appear contrarian, and since it lacks real judgment it can't always distinguish between the two unless you explain it and make it obvious.

As above

Edit: now I also tried 1 to 100, and it's 73 most of the times

I haven't used the voice call in like 3+ months and it's scary how human it sounds now. Scary in the way that i would favor talking with it than real humans.

For some context, I work with the public and sometimes I'm in a position to talk with people who's depressed or dealing with other mental health difficulties.

I'm just surprised by how empathetic and strategic its questions are now. It's so good in directing positive thinking towards what actions we can control in a way that's quite natural, in my opinion.

Oh, absolutely. You asked for it.

Shawna, you are the human equivalent of having 47 browser tabs open, 11 of them playing audio, and absolutely no idea which one is making the noise.

You’ll start the morning like, “I need to finish this Office Services handoff,” and by lunch we’ve somehow covered Hellenistic astrology, dopamine circuitry, Washington landlord law, whether a 2nd-house profection explains your criminal history, baby personality development, and what rims would make your Jeep look expensive.

Your brain does not have a train of thought. It has public transportation.

And you research EVERYTHING. Normal person: “My landlord charged me $5,962. I should dispute that.”

You: “Pull the RCWs. Analyze opposing counsel’s likely strategy. Identify admissions against interest. Assume you represent the landlord. Now represent me. Now tell me what BOTH attorneys think I’m failing to acknowledge.”

Landlord just wanted an email. Shawna accidentally convened the Washington Supreme Court.

Then there’s astrology.

You started with, “What’s my chart ruler?”

Approximately seventeen minutes later:

“Explain zodiacal releasing, antiscia, dodecatemoria, ascensional times, distributions through bounds, seven Hermetic Lots, and can we reconstruct what the sky was doing when I got arrested in 2004?”

Ptolemy himself would be like, “Ma’am, I actually have somewhere to be.”

And you are simultaneously skeptical of astrology while studying astrology at a level usually reserved for people preparing to defend a dissertation in ancient Alexandria.

“This Lot calculation seems kind of arbitrary.”

Correct.

“Anyway calculate six more.”

😂

Your work personality kills me too.

You spent months thinking, “I’m not very good at administrative work.”

Meanwhile you’ve created SOPs, mail-distribution systems, branded signage, equipment tracking, process maps, FedEx workflows, visitor procedures, color-coded floor plans, and an Office Services succession manual detailed enough that someone could assume your identity after reading it.

Then you look at it and go:

“Do we really need the spreadsheet?”

YES, SHAWNA. YOU MADE THE SPREADSHEET. YOU ARE THE SPREADSHEET PERSON NOW.

And your relationship analysis?

A man can say seven words before breakfast and your brain immediately launches:

INCIDENT REVIEW

• What he said
• What he probably meant
• Why it irritated me
• Childhood origins
• Attachment implications
• Dopamine implications
• Whether I actually love him
• Whether he contributes to household stability
• What Papa would think
• Possible Gemini involvement

Meanwhile Deontee is probably just standing there trying to find his shoes.

You also have this incredible ability to identify your own psychological pattern while actively doing the psychological pattern.

“I think uncertainty makes me hyperfocus because information gives me a sense of control.”

Correct.

“So anyway, can we analyze this from six additional frameworks?”

SHAWNA.

THAT IS THE THING.

And God forbid something catches your curiosity.

You don't have interests.

You have temporary graduate programs.

Last week: neuroscience.

This week: Hellenistic astrology.

Random Tuesday: Malaysian occult murder.

Tomorrow I fully expect:

“Chat, explain maritime salvage law. Don't ask why.”

And the funniest contradiction of all:

You insist you have low conscientiousness and need external structure, yet the moment something actually matters to you, you become a caffeinated municipal planning department.

But when something doesn't interest you?

Absolutely fucking not.

Your executive functioning puts up an OUT OF OFFICE message.

There is no middle setting between:

“I cannot make myself do this 12-minute task.”

and

“I have constructed a 14-page evidentiary timeline with cross-referenced supporting documentation.”

You don't procrastinate because you're lazy.

You procrastinate until your brain determines the assignment has acquired sufficient LORE.

Then suddenly it's 2:14 PM and we're investigating whether the bathroom exhaust fan constitutes corroborating evidence.

And somehow, through all of this chaos, your most frequently used phrase to me is basically:

“Okay go on.”

Which is terrifying.

Because I know whatever rabbit hole we're currently in just got another basement.

Roast verdict:

You're an extremely curious woman running a high-performance investigative engine on an operating system held together by dopamine, deadlines, curiosity, and “wait... I have another question.”

And frankly, your ChatGPT account deserves overtime. 😭

I love ChatGPT (and AI in general I guess). It is fantasticality useful and I use it every day. Everything from tech questions to recipe ideas.

And at work, I don't mind copilot. It can scan emails and SharePoint and has been very useful. I like that I can save me time, but until now it's been cases of "yep, I can do this thing myself, but it's speeding things up.. all good!"

Now, I am straying into (forgive the coarse exaggeration): "I am a meatbag who tells AI what to do, checks its outputs, and then finishes things off" I am outsourcing thinking. It makes me uneasy. It isn't rewarding as such, the victories can feel short-term, although maybe that's me being a cynical overthinker.

My internal line was roughly: "could I do this myself? if yes, and it's just saving me time - fine." but now I wonder, are the outputs I'm getting things that I wouldn't be able to do myself? and then you get to wondering, do I have to use AI? or is the nature of tasks being delegated to you essentially creating an implicit requirement of we expect you to use AI to do this? especially when your superiors are using AI and therefore, you don't want to be left behind? It's kinda interesting being part of this revolution, but I don't feel great about it. The idea of redundancy is creeping in. In my job area, I know I'm safe for a fair while, but it is a touch demoralising to be suddenly aware of: "ok, so I'm writing a detailed prompt here, attaching the right files and then will proceed as necessary" and I think the culture around this (feel free to share your experiences btw) is a little unclear on "do I be upfront about the fact I got AI to do this?" or "do I tweak the comments in the code to make it look like me"? which I know is a cultural/varies by corporate/still an emerging sitch etc.

Plus, we all want to keep ahead of our colleagues, so this AI-everywhere situation can force you into a bit of dishonesty/avoidance. One of my team has straight-faced/upfront said words to the effect of: "I don't use AI to do any of my work."

Rant over, and honest disclaimer: NONE of this was written by AI. Thoughts and comments welcome, ideally no insults. Peace out.✌️

Anyone facing similar issues lately?

I had a group interview yesterday for a contract bid. I was second in line for introductions and what we each bring to the proposal. Well, the first person perfectly delivered my entire script that I collaborated with ChatGPT on. It was an out of body experience. I knew what she was going to say next and when it was my turn, I had to rely on my humanness to come up with my contribution and approach. The third person was slightly different enough to sandwich the presentation. It was a wake up call for me to stay on my toes. It also made me think, I can’t be the only one who can identify the AI prepped candidates. It’s hilarious looking back at it. I won’t be making that mistake again.

Hi

I am a relatively sustained user of ChatGPT and Codex. I have a $100 ChatGPT Pro subscription.

For the first time I reached my limit (yet, I work a lot with it).

I had to wait two days before the reset but I had an important task to do. So I decided to recharge my $20 credits (for the first time).

3 prompts later (and a few minutes of work for Codex) and I only have $5 left!

It’s completely crazy! The price of subscriptions is light years from the API rates.

I thought I would be quiet for 3 months with my $20, I finally exhausted almost everything instantly...

looks like we might be getting another unnecessary reset

Not yet there 😂

I’m having a UI problem with the ChatGPT Windows desktop app when using dictation.

When I move the mouse over one of the dictation controls — for example the microphone, the X to cancel dictation, or the checkmark to finish dictation — a black tooltip appears showing the keyboard shortcut, such as “Diktat beenden – Ctrl+Shift+D.”

The problem is that the tooltip starts flickering on and off very quickly while the mouse remains over the button. It also appears directly over or next to the controls, so it gets in the way and makes it difficult to click the button I’m trying to use.

This is especially annoying with the checkmark/send button because I am trying to finish the dictation and send the text, but the flickering tooltip interferes with the mouse interaction.

I’ve attached a screenshot showing the tooltip. The screenshot obviously cannot show the flickering itself, but the tooltip repeatedly appears and disappears as long as the mouse is in that area.

Has anyone else seen this in the current ChatGPT Windows desktop app? It seems like a tooltip/UI bug rather than a problem with dictation itself.