I can maybe understand the frustration from a “scientific” perspective, but for a lot of these “one prompt papers” - you still need someone to sit down and do t

I can maybe understand the frustration from a “scientific” perspective, but for a lot of these “one prompt papers” - you still need someone to sit down and do the analysis and comparisons. Very few papers focus only on GPT/ChatGPT. Additionally, it gives people other ideas to try for themselves. And some of this stuff might be useful to someone in a specific scenario. It’s not glamorous research or even future-proof seeing as how certain prompts can be surgically removed or blocked by the owner of the model, but I don’t think it warrants telling people not to do it.