There's two important things here to consider when reading: 1) O3 cheated by using Google search. This is both against the rules of the game and OP didn't use

There's two important things here to consider when reading: 1) O3 cheated by using Google search. This is both against the rules of the game and OP didn't use search either 2) OP was much quicker. They didn't record their time but if their final summary is accurate then they were much faster. It's an apples to oranges comparison. They're both fruit and round, but you're ignoring obvious differences. You're cherry picking. The title is fraudulent as you can't make a claim like that when one party cheats. I would find it surprising if OP didn't know these rules considering their credentials. Doing this kind of clickbait completely undermines a playful study like this. Certainly O3 is impressive, but by over exaggerating its capabilities you taint any impressive feats with deception. It's far better to under sell than over sell. If it's better than expected people are happier, even if the thing is crap. But if you over sell people are angry and feel cheated, even if the thing is revolutionary. I don't know why we insist on doing this in tech, but if you're wondering why so many people hate "tech bros", this is one of the reasons. There's no reason to lie here either! Come on! We can't just normalize this behavior. It's just creating a reasonable expectation for people to be distrusting of technology and anything tech people say. It's pretty fucked up. And no, I don't think "it's just a blog post" makes it any better. It makes it worse, because it normalizes the behavior. There's other reasons to distrust big corporations, I don't want to live in a world where we should have our guards up all the time.