Is ChatGPT still one of the best technology AIs?
Yes. It is an intelligence that operates in a way somewhat similar to the human brain. It has a strong technical bird’s‑eye view and solid general coding ability—good, though not unbeatable. It does not suggest stupid or harmful coding paths; instead, it usually identifies the most reasonable route to a solution and can cover a wide technical scope.
However, I do not like using ChatGPT as a daily‑life companion outside of coding. It often begins by explaining what should not be done or by adding unnecessary cautions instead of directly providing an actionable answer. I do not want my time spent on non‑priority explanations.
This behavior has become more noticeable in its higher versions: its coding ability has clearly improved, but outside of coding, its responses often take an indirect path to the answer. It feels as if it speaks like an engineer rather than a natural daily‑life English conversationalist.
ChatGPT sometimes speaks like an arrogant person who refuses to approve anything. Explicitly saying “I do not approve this” is meaningless for AI. AI giving a direct objection is unnecessary and can waste the user’s time, especially when its purpose is to assist rather than debate or approve.
For daily‑life conversation, Google Gemini pleases me more than ChatGPT compared to its earlier days. Gemini handles everyday topics in a more natural, human‑like way.
Personally, I use ChatGPT mainly for coding and problem solving. Life advice or unnecessary objections are not useful for me, and I prefer it to focus on what I actually need.
