> The fact they are so convincing at it is a different, but definitely new and horrific problem on its own. I tried one to help me get the syntax right for the

> The fact they are so convincing at it is a different, but definitely new and horrific problem on its own. I tried one to help me get the syntax right for the config file for a program. It started by generating a config file for the latest version and not the old one I was using, but once I told it that, it fixed that convincingly and spit out a config file that looked like it was for my version. However, the reason I asked for help was that the feature was very badly documented, and yet ChatGPT happily invented syntax for the thing I was having problems with. And every time I told it that it didn't look quite right, it confidently invented new syntax for the feature. Everything it made up looked pretty damn convincing, if I had designed the config file format I could have gone with either of those suggestions, but they were all wrong, as evidenced by the config file validator in the program. At least Stack Overflow had comments and votes that helped you gauge the usefulness of the answer. These glorified toasters have neither.