I think the issue is just that people are using different words to mean the same thing. If we get precise, take for example what you said earlier: > it's slig

I think the issue is just that people are using different words to mean the same thing. If we get precise, take for example what you said earlier: > it's slightly better than the mean across all topics. Most people who can do "better than average across all topics" usually aren't considered "dumb" at all. They might even be considered impressive, albeit being a jack of all trades might be a career disadvantage. In these discussions I see (generally) a strong sentiment among the naysayers along the lines of "because ChatGPT is so overhyped, I've decided to play it cool and downplay it as a reaction to the hype". And hence the other comment suggesting that you're intentionally not allowing yourself to be impressed by the state of the art achievements. IMHO there's too much arguing over how we should subjectively "feel" about the new tech. Everyone should be free to "feel" whatever they want to feel about the state of things, whether being impressed or not.