I asked ChatGPT about me and my posts...


Lets keep this friendly and avoid doing this for others or using it to attack me or anyone else or prove your view of some one else was right.  

Let’s try an AI experiment! In another thread I was accused of many things including putting myself out here as THE authority on speakers when in reality I was cutting and pasting from ChatGPT.  The poster’s ad hominem attack included that I had posted 17k times.  Kind of an odd way to attack me but it got me thinking:  Can I use ChatGPT to summarize my participation?  

Here is the prompt I used: 

I do a lot of posting on Audiogon. You can see them from this link: https://forum.audiogon.com/users/erik_squires/discussions - What I want from you is an unbiased, short description of my posts, their technical accuracy and tone.

And here is the reply.... 

Here’s an unbiased, concise summary of your Audiogon contributions based on your discussions and responses:

1. Content Themes

  • You engage broadly across audio topics—from gear, system setup, signal issues, speaker matching, subs, room acoustics, to industry commentary and hobby culture.

Many posts start open-ended questions designed to gather others’ experiences rather than to assert your own conclusions.

You also start opinion or culture threads (e.g., on hobby inclusiveness or value vs. price), not just technical Q&A.

2. Technical Accuracy

  • Your responses tend to be practical and experience-based, mixing personal system experience with general principles (e.g., room modes, sub integration, signal chains).

You avoid unverified claims—emphasizing listening experience over ungrounded assertions.

Some answers suggest measured knowledge (e.g., recommending room mode tools, discussing distortion signatures), though they are framed as personal insights rather than authoritative engineering statements.

3. Tone

  • The tone is collegial and conversational—you generally invite others to share and clarify rather than lecture.

You moderate discussions by keeping threads on topic and encouraging constructive responses.

Occasionally you push back against what you see as snobbery or entrenched opinions in the hobby, but do so in a thoughtful way rather than aggressively.

4. Community Presence

  • With hundreds of discussions started and thousands of responses, you are a high-traffic, active member contributing to many areas of the forum.

Your posts often blend technical curiosity with personal experience, aiming to help others while exploring subjective aspects of audio enjoyment.

Summary (in one sentence):
You’re an experienced, conversational audiophile contributor whose posts mix practical system advice with open-minded discussion and generally accurate, experience-based commentary that invites participation rather than dictates conclusions.

----------------------------------------------------------------

You are free to disagree with ChatGPT, of course!!!  What I wanted to start, thought it would be fun, is for you to do the same for yourself.  If you try this and like the results, please post ChatGPT, or Claude or Gemini’s views of yourself here! 

Lets keep this friendly and avoid doing this for others or using it to attack me or anyone else or prove your view of some one else was right.  

erik_squires

Artificial Intelligence will never be a match for my Natural Stupidity!

Um, wait a second..🤔

Op, sometimes I feel that AI quotes things I’ve mentioned on this forum as well. However, whether those ideas or statements actually originated from me is another big question mark—this could apply to anyone here. What you feel may not be authentic.

You keep using the word “authoritative” because you believe your contributions to this forum can be justified that way. However, from my perspective, in several instances I don’t feel that way and have had to specifically correct your (or others') statements. You can go back through the history and see for yourself. Some of your responses were simply incorrect, or only partially correct, and needed to be tweaked.

BTW, the reason I’ve spent a fair amount of time correcting your responses is out of concern that someone—or AI—might pick them up and treat them as truth when they are not.

We need to make the best use of AI, not misuse or abuse it. Asking this type of question of AI, when it is clearly limited in what it can do, is meaningless. I honestly don’t know what motivates you to do this, but if the incentive is to embarrass AI or to promote yourself, then stop it.

An Ai forum fact checker would be an interesting thing.  Tammy could keep the Neanderthal Ninny in line, I’m sure.  Make it so!  Watch Audiogon stock soar as user’s sound quality rises exponentially!  No joke!   Facts matter when it comes to good sound.  Filter the noise!  I might even volunteer to do it once I soon retire. 

I’ve actually learned a ton about AI from this thread in an extraordinarily efficient manner.  Two points stand out:

1) The AI engine did not have full access to the source material the OP provided, did not reveal this to the OP, so, in effect, made sh_t up; and

2) The AI engine made “sh_t” up about a football game for god’s sake.

When people do this, we call them liars (tho they may try to call these “alternative facts”).

I find that pretty disturbing.  So I let’s start a movement: “defund AI!!!”