I am so frustrated by every boomer (in spirit, not necessarily in age) complaining they ‘tried AI/chatgpt’ once or twice

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are you frustrated by others experiences? ChatGPT is pretty bad sometimes. I asked it for a map of Asia to help with a kids' homework assignment and it basically gave me a kidney shaped blob. I hope people aren't blindly using it assuming it knows what it's doing.

Because I am in a work environment and people are expected to use it. If you don’t see how useful it is, you are likely not a professional and/or you are not using it correctly.

FYI free ChatGPT is notoriously poor with imagery. You have to understand how it works for one.

What kind of stuff are you expected to use it for?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are you frustrated by others experiences? ChatGPT is pretty bad sometimes. I asked it for a map of Asia to help with a kids' homework assignment and it basically gave me a kidney shaped blob. I hope people aren't blindly using it assuming it knows what it's doing.

Because I am in a work environment and people are expected to use it. If you don’t see how useful it is, you are likely not a professional and/or you are not using it correctly.

FYI free ChatGPT is notoriously poor with imagery. You have to understand how it works for one.

Oh ok. Other people "just don't get it". Sure.

[Anonymous]

I find it odd that OP is so adamant on saying that people are infallible, but AI isn't. The tech bros have spent $40B on it and haven't made a profit. Remember the disastrous Meta live demonstration? Do you think Mark Zuckerburg allowed a bad prompt to be given live?

[Anonymous]

So you are using a birth year range to insult people whose birthdates fall outside of that range?

I am surprised AI works for you at all.

[Anonymous]

I fed my DD’s list of 20 spelling words into it and told it to put them in alphabetical order. ChatGPT had 3 errors. I used it as an example of why not to blindly follow chatGPT.

[Anonymous]

pp here, I guess Mark Zuckerberg is an idiot.

https://www.facebook.com/dailydot/posts/ceo-mark-zuckerberg-scrambles-as-the-live-demonstration-of-metas-live-ai-fails-d/1167991925196361/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So you are using a birth year range to insult people whose birthdates fall outside of that range?

I am surprised AI works for you at all.

Probably used Chat to come up with that information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So offered up some tips.

The free version of Chat wrote this up in about 2 seconds.

⸻

HOW TO USE CHATGPT EFFECTIVELY

A Clear Instruction Manual

⸻

PART 1: What ChatGPT Is & How It Works

What ChatGPT Is

ChatGPT is a large language model (LLM) trained on massive amounts of text.
Its job is to predict what words should come next in a sequence.

It does not:
• Think independently
• Have beliefs or intentions
• Understand meaning the way humans do
• Access real-time information unless specifically searching

It does:
• Detect patterns in language
• Predict highly probable word sequences
• Organize, summarize, compare, and structure information
• Simulate tone, perspective, and reasoning styles

⸻

How It Works (The Statistical Core)

At its foundation, ChatGPT is a probability engine.

Here’s the simplified mechanics:
1. During training, it analyzed billions of text examples.
2. It learned statistical relationships between words, phrases, and structures.
3. When you type a prompt, it:
• Breaks your text into tokens (small chunks of language).
• Calculates the probability of what token is most likely to come next.
• Repeats that prediction process token by token.
4. The result is a coherent response built from statistical likelihoods.

It is not retrieving a stored answer.

It is generating a new answer each time based on:
• Your prompt
• Context from the conversation
• Probability patterns it learned during training

You can think of it as:

A predictive text system with extremely advanced pattern recognition.

⸻

Why Prompt Quality Matters

Because the system works probabilistically:
• Vague input → Broad probability distribution → Generic output
• Specific input → Narrow probability distribution → Focused output

The model does not “know what you meant.”
It only knows what your words statistically imply.

⸻

PART 2: The Core Rule of Prompting

Clarity > Cleverness

Do not try to be poetic.
Do not rely on implication.
Be explicit about what you want.

Imagine you are briefing a highly intelligent assistant who:
• Has no background knowledge of your situation
• Cannot infer unstated context
• Responds directly to what is written, not what is implied

⸻

PART 3: The 5-Component Prompt Framework

When you want high-quality output, include:

1. Context

What is happening?

“I am preparing for a performance review.”

⸻

2. Objective

What outcome do you want?

“I want to communicate impact without sounding defensive.”

⸻

3. Constraints

What should be avoided or emphasized?

“Keep it concise. Avoid emotional language.”

⸻

4. Format

How should the output be structured?

“Provide bullet points.”
“Write a short script.”
“Create a decision tree.”

⸻

5. Depth Level

How detailed should it be?

“Give a brief overview.”
“Provide a deep analysis with tradeoffs.”

The more of these you define, the more precise the result.

⸻

PART 4: High-Leverage Prompt Types

These consistently produce strong output.

⸻

1. Structured Explanation

Instead of:

Explain blockchain.

Try:

Explain blockchain in 5 bullet points, then give one real-world example.

⸻

2. Role-Based Framing

Assign a perspective.

Respond as a hiring manager.
Respond as a skeptical reviewer.
Respond as a strategic communications advisor.

This shifts tone and analytical lens.

⸻

3. Comparative Analysis

Instead of:

Is this a good idea?

Try:

Evaluate this idea from supportive, neutral, and critical perspectives.

This increases depth.

⸻

4. Intent-Based Rewriting

Instead of:

Make this better.

Try:

Rewrite this to sound calm and authoritative, not defensive.

Tone clarity produces better edits.

⸻

5. Tradeoff Exploration

Ask for downside analysis.

What are the risks of this decision?
What long-term consequences should be considered?
What hidden assumptions are present?

This avoids one-sided output.

⸻

6. Iterative Refinement

The first output is often a draft.

Follow up with:
• Make it sharper.
• Reduce by 30%.
• Increase directness.
• Remove emotional tone.
• Add strategic framing.

Treat the interaction as iterative.

⸻

PART 5: Common Mistakes

❌ Being Vague

“Thoughts?” produces generic commentary.

❌ Asking Multiple Unrelated Questions

Break into separate prompts for clarity.

❌ Omitting Audience

Advice for executives differs from advice for students.

❌ Assuming Context Carries Over

Restate important details when precision matters.

⸻

PART 6: Advanced Techniques

These move from basic use to expert use.

⸻

1. Assumption Detection

What assumptions are embedded in this reasoning?

⸻

2. Power & Incentive Analysis

What incentives are influencing the people involved?

⸻

3. Pattern Recognition

What behavioral pattern is emerging?

⸻

4. Decision Tree Generation

Build a decision tree for how to handle this scenario.

⸻

5. Counterargument Construction

Make the strongest argument against this position.

This strengthens critical thinking.

⸻

PART 7: A Reusable Prompt Template

Copy and fill this in:

Context:
Objective:
Constraints:
Audience:
Format:
Depth Level:

Using this template significantly improves output quality.

⸻

Final Principle

ChatGPT is not an answer machine.
It is a language probability system that performs best under structured instruction.

The more clearly you define:
• The situation
• The desired outcome
• The boundaries
• The format

…the more useful and precise the response will be.

⸻

If you’d like, I can next create:
• A one-page condensed “Power User” sheet
• Or an even deeper technical explanation of transformers and attention mechanisms
• Or a version written for teaching others how to use AI effectively

This drivel you just posted is a perfect example of why ChatGPT is an emperor with no clothes. I wish Jeff would institute a policy that people who post on DCUM write their own words. You are wasting bandwidth and hogging up resources in Loudoun County Data Centers that could be put to better use.

[Anonymous]

It’s been hyped up so much people expect to be amazed. When they use it falls so far below expectations, that they completely reject it.

Emerging technology is always like this. Remember the modems, slow, shrieking noise to connect? The first generation video conferencing set ups? The luggable laptop? The car satellite phone attached to the center console?

[Anonymous]

AI makes average people sound smarter than they are. But when you respond, you are responding to them.

I do not have a lot of use for a "highly intelligent assistant who:
• Has no background knowledge of your situation
• Cannot infer unstated context"

A really good coworker saves me more time than AI. I do understand that AI might raise the quality of work across the org.

We are in active experimentation mode right now. It can be amusing but I haven't saved tons of time.

[Anonymous]

You said:
Someone is arguing on DCUM that boomers complaint after using ChatGPT once or twice that it failed to deliver good results and is not useful, what do you say to that and do you agree?

Answer:
That’s a really interesting DCUM-style debate 😊

Short answer: I don’t agree with the blanket dismissal, but I do understand where it comes from.

Here’s how I’d break it down:

1. Using ChatGPT once or twice is like using Google once in 1999
If someone typed a vague prompt like:

“Help me with my resume”

and got a generic answer, they might conclude:

“This is useless.”

But AI tools are highly sensitive to:

How specific the prompt is

Whether you give context

Whether you refine the output

Whether you iterate

The people who get the most value treat it like a collaborative tool, not a magic oracle.

2. There is a learning curve (and that’s not generational)
This isn’t really about boomers. It’s about expectations.

Many people assume:

It should read their mind

It should know their situation

It should give a perfect, finished product in one shot

That’s not how it works.

It works better when you:

Give constraints

Give examples

Ask for revisions

Clarify tone, audience, format

The first interaction often is underwhelming because most people under-specify their request.

3. Some complaints are valid
There are legitimate reasons someone might be unimpressed:

They asked for something factual and got a confident but wrong answer.

They wanted deep domain expertise and got surface-level content.

They expected creativity and got generic output.

They tested it with something extremely niche.

If you only try it twice and both outputs feel generic, it’s understandable to think: “meh.”

4. The generational angle is a red herring
On DCUM (which, let’s be honest, loves a generational framing 😄), “boomers vs. everyone else” is easy bait.

But what actually predicts usefulness is:

Curiosity

Willingness to experiment

Comfort iterating

Understanding that prompting is a skill

I’ve seen:

70-year-olds using AI to draft legal letters brilliantly

25-year-olds who think it’s dumb because they asked one vague question

It’s not age. It’s how you use it.

5. Where I do agree with skeptics
AI is not:

A substitute for expertise in complex fields

A guaranteed source of truth

Always worth using for simple tasks

Automatically better than doing it yourself

If someone tried it for something trivial and saw no efficiency gain, their conclusion might be rational — for that use case.

My take
Saying “ChatGPT is useless because I tried it twice” is like saying:

“Excel is useless because my first spreadsheet didn’t help.”

“The internet is overrated because I couldn’t find what I wanted.”

It’s not that it’s automatically amazing.
It’s that it’s tool-shaped — and tools reward skill.

If you want a sharper debate-ready response for DCUM, I can draft one that’s:

Snappy and slightly snarky

Calm and analytical

Or politely devastating 😄

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
This drivel you just posted is a perfect example of why ChatGPT is an emperor with no clothes. I wish Jeff would institute a policy that people who post on DCUM write their own words. You are wasting bandwidth and hogging up resources in Loudoun County Data Centers that could be put to better use.

I do have that policy. From our FAQ (which is linked on the left):

I like using ChatGPT or another AI system. Should I ask ChatGPT to answer a question and post the response here?

No. The value of DCUM and other forums is the input from actual humans. If posters wanted to get a response from ChatGPT, they would have asked it themselves. We will delete AI responses when we see them.

I don't delete the previous poster's AI response because it sort of proves the point of what is wrong with AI.

Please report any AI responses and I will remove them.

[Anonymous]

Well, I don't have to use it twice to hate it. I'll keep using my brain, which works fine. If you choose to outsource yours, I'll assume that yours doesn't.

[Anonymous]

But AI tools are highly sensitive to:

How specific the prompt is

Whether you give context

Whether you refine the output

Whether you iterate

The people who get the most value treat it like a collaborative tool, not a magic oracle.

The problem with this is that if you're reasonably intelligent, it's much easier to just do it yourself. I imagine AI is helpful for people who can't think for themselves or write at all, which is a sizable enough cohort.

[Anonymous]

I’ve seen:

70-year-olds using AI to draft legal letters brilliantly

And the letters were tested in litigation and won? Or they generated the letter and people said "wow that sounds really good!" because they were impressed by a bunch of jargon words?