This was part of a longer conversation. It's pretty long and it got confused pretty easily, so I had to correct it multiple times. It was an interesting experie

This was part of a longer conversation. It's pretty long and it got confused pretty easily, so I had to correct it multiple times. It was an interesting experience in its novelty, but it felt like pulling teeth to get it to give me a move. - It insisted multiple times that it was not a chess player. "As an AI language model" it's not physically capable of playing chess, nor does it have a personality, so it couldn't play chess but was able to be an "AI chess assistant". - As is ChatGPT's default M.O., it was a wordy son of a bot. Giving me explanations which fields would be controlled and what pieces would be developed, and what not. Often analysing my move too. - It repeatedly offered multiple move options, so I had to ask it for only one move every move. - After my fifth move it couldn't come up with a good move, so I asked it to describe the board. It did, and it even drew me a diagram. The diagram was complete nonsense: it had 9 black pawns for a start. The description was okay-ish, but not good enough. I could correct that though, but it took two iterations. I didn't get much further with it. It was completely confused about the state of the board and the possible moves. Still, it did know which game it was playing and more or less how to act with it, so I was still kind of impressed. You can really tell that it is a language model, not just because it bloody keeps reminding you, but also by the things it does wrong and right. E.g. getting wordy analysis or legible descriptions, but ridiculous diagrams. As another example: at one point it corrected me. I accidentally used notation in my native language ("Pg3") and it said that it was invalid but assumed I meant "Ng3". That was correct, it's clearly better at talking about chess than playing chess.