I don't know how anyone who's used it for a bit cannot see how useless it is. When it contradicts itself, you can ask it to provide references for each side, a

I don't know how anyone who's used it for a bit cannot see how useless it is. When it contradicts itself, you can ask it to provide references for each side, and it will cheerfully fabricate what look like perfect and relevant references, but are broken links or to papers about cats. And this doesn't hinge on whether one of the "sides" is entirely fictional or not. I am actually trying to learn javascript and python off and on, and you would think there's nothing it's more suited for. It sure looks as though some work went into making its output for simple programming questions look good. matplotlib seems byzantine and annoying, and I really thought this might be a good use case. But no, it's just the same as anything else. I type this: "add a square patch to a pyplot table cell" (and yes, that probably doesn't make any sense to someone who knows what they are doing, and that is the point) And I get this: # get the cell patch for the center cell cell = tbl[1, 1].get_children()[0] # create a square patch with a red fill color patch = table.CellPatch(0.5, 0.5, width=0.3, height=0.3, facecolor='red') # add the patch to the cell cell.set_facecolor('white') # set the cell color to white so the patch shows up cell.add_artist(patch) It looks plausible when you have no idea what any of it means. But quickly I discover (among other things) there is no CellPatch method. Someone somewhere named a variable cellpatch. And ChatGPT adeptly combined the capitalization of a method with a variable name to produce a plausible alternative reality. It's amazing! But it's not helpful. It's not helpful precisely because it's so good at making its answers look plausible.