Better Offline - Monologue: The Agony Of GPT-5

Episode Date: August 15, 2025

In this week’s monologue, Ed Zitron walks through the rough launch of GPT-5, and how ChatGPT’s fandom-like following has become a huge problem for OpenAI. The Enshittification of Generative AI: https://www.wheresyoured.at/the-enshittification-of-generative-ai/ The Wall Street Journal - The Next Great Leap in AI Is Behind Schedule and Crazy Expensive:https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/openai-gpt5-orion-delays-639e7693?ref=wheresyoured.at  Live service game post: https://bsky.app/profile/catharsis23.bsky.social/post/3lw5jvotgfk2 Better Offline listener deal: Get $15 Off Where's Your Ed At Premium! Deal goes until the end of August.https://edzitronswheresyouredatghostio.outpost.pub/public/promo-subscription/better-offline-discount YOU CAN NOW BUY BETTER OFFLINE MERCH! Go to https://cottonbureau.com/people/better-offline and use code FREE99 for free shipping on orders of $99 or more. BUY A LIMITED EDITION BETTER OFFLINE CHALLENGE COIN! https://cottonbureau.com/p/XSH74N/challenge-coin/better-offline-challenge-coin#/29269226/gold-metal-1.75in --- LINKS: https://www.tinyurl.com/betterofflinelinks Newsletter: https://www.wheresyoured.at/ Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/BetterOffline/  Discord: chat.wheresyoured.at Ed's Socials: https://twitter.com/edzitron https://www.instagram.com/edzitronSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an IHeart podcast. Guaranteed Human. Run a business and not thinking about podcasting. Think again. More Americans listen to podcasts than adds supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora. And as the number one podcaster, IHearts twice as large as the next two combined. Learn how podcasting can help your business. Call 8444-844-I-Hart.

Hello and welcome to this week's Better Offline monologue. I'm your host, Ed Zitron. Better Offline. And this has been a tough week. I'm not going to lie. day we recorded a wonderful episode with Victoria's Song and Ashman Rodriguez, which got lost due to a technical fall, and then I recorded this entire monologue, which then got lost to a completely different computer, different room, different place, technical error. I love making this show for

all of you. It's been kind of a pisser, but it's important we get on top of this goddamn subject. So check the episode notes, buy a challenge coin, read the newsletter. There's a premium version unrelated to this show. I'd love if you'd subscribe, and if you don't, I won't feel anything. Don't worry about it, but let's get to it. Last week, Open AI, launched GPT5, a new flagship model of some sort that's allegedly better at coding and writing, but in reality is much more of the same. Another model is intermittently better at benchmarks built specifically for large language models because they can't do actual work. The Wall Street Journal reported late last year that it took multiple half-billion-dollar training runs to get GPT-5 off the ground,

and Altman himself said in the podcast with Theo von of all people that GPT-5 scared him, and made him say, what have we done? And that's a good bloody question, Sammy. According to OpenAI, GPT-5 is a unified system with a smart, efficient model that answers most questions, a deeper reasoning model and a real-time router that quickly decides which model to use based on conversation type, complexity, tool needs,

and your explicit intent. I read all of that out because I wanted you to hear how convoluted GPT-5 is and how much effort OpenAI has had to put in to create something that, based on all reports, is fine. To quote Simon Willison, it just does stuff. Wowy-Zowie!

In simpler terms, Chad GPT's version of GPT5 takes a user's prompt and decides which model to use as a result, choosing one of a few sub-mottles, GPT-5 regular, Mini or Nano, and then spits out an output. And there are rate limits, by the way,

so if you use it too much, you get kicked down to Mini automatically. If you ask it to think about something, it will choose to engage the reasoning part of the model. These things do not think, by the way, they are probabilistic models. So reasoning is kind of like you get a prompt and then it reads the prompt with another model and says, okay, what would the steps be to execute this?

It has some returns, but recent papers suggest that it doesn't work that well. Anyway, using this, you mostly have to trust that OpenAI will choose the best model for the job as opposed to the cheapest one for OpenAI to serve, which is what I think they're actually doing. As part of the launch OpenAI has also killed access to all other models, at least it's planning to, and truncated user access to two choices, GBT5 or GPD5 thinking, with Legation. models like 04, 04 mini, and their associated rate limits gone immediately for most, although some of them are back, and in 60 days for people paying $200 a month. You'll work out why I'm dithering in a second. This enraged the chat GPT subreddit with users claiming that GPT5 was, and I quote, wearing the skin of their dead friend, referring to GBT40, and another saying that GPT4.5

Genuinely talked to them, and as pathetic as it sounds, was their only friend. And it must be clear, we can make fun of these people if we want, but this is actually genuinely, like, sad. There is something going on here where people are so lonely that they want to talk to a chat bar. Mock them if you want, and some of you will, and I don't know if I even want to. But something is happening here, and it isn't brilliant. But after a few days, Clammy Samo and restored access to GPD4 overpaid users, and then this only managed to stem the type briefly, with one user saying that their baby was back, that they cried a lot, and that they were crying as they wrote the post, ending by saying, love you, I assume to GPD.

Here's the problem, though. Users are now doubting that the 4-0 that OpenAI has restored is actually the same model. One post claims that 4-0 has lost its soul and another says that 4-0 is lobotomized all the way down. In one thread, one user said that 4-0 had gotten markedly worse suddenly, and another said it's definitely not the same, though others in the thread claim that it was. Another post said Legacy GPT-4-0 is GPT-5 in cosplay, even as others pleaded with them, and said it was exactly the same, and that people were experiencing some strange

phantom love a placebo effect. And I think that's actually what's going on writ large. Chat GPT was never a success based on its actual abilities or outputs or things it could do, but a global marketing campaign perpetuated by a take and business media, asleep at the wheel, or worse still, that wanted these companies to win and help them by lying. I have done a comprehensive evaluation of the last three years of press around chat GPT and GPT itself, and you will look in the things in 2023 and there's shit that's just fucking made up. There's a whole, go on look up task rabbit gpt4 there are so many i'm going to link one in the fucking notes there are people that claim that gpt4 ordered a task rabbit to complete a capture now on top of this not being a thing

that task rabbit generally does this is from the system card of gpt4 and it uh claims that it hired a task rabbit except when you look it just said it messaged them it's very clearly made up but everyone reported it as agents existing in 2023 ah every time i read this stuff i feel little goddamn insane. But anyway, because these models do not have obvious replicable ways outside of benchmarks of testing what they can do, each user is effectively in a constant vibe check with the models, and the sycophantic qualities of GPT-40 were clearly enough to endear them to the platform. People using GPT-40, they couldn't tell you why it's different to GPT-5, other than it feels less human or doesn't do the same things, even if those things are kind of hard to define. This is what

happens when you build a following for a product based on specious hype and vague promises, and lies of inference, of course, and then allow users to make up the reasons that they care. You begin engaging with the gamer mindset, a vibes-based fandom that's completely unbreakable, unless you make one subtle change that you could never see coming, that breaks the illusion, leading to gamer-like distrust and anger. You see, I theorize that the vast majority of ChadGPT users do not know where they used it in the first place. three years of media pressure to use AI, that AI was the future, their bosses saying AI is important, and that you would be left behind if you didn't use AI mean that people

come to chat GPT to work out while they're using it in the first place, which has led to all sorts of bizarre emotional attachments, kind of like one's attachments to a live service game and shout out to Catharsis 23 on Blue Sky who made this observation. As a result, users were incredibly sensitive to changes like removing or changing a model, because their association with chat GPT was based on however GPT4O works and sound. By ripping it out and replacing it with GPT-5, users immediately felt jilted and swindled by OpenAI, and much like a dying live service game, any changes that have been made as a result were met with paranoia and confusion. Clamy Allaltman's attempts to paper over the problem by boosting rate limits on GPT5's thinking,

and restoring access to GPT-40 and other models for paid users were not enough, because in a very real sense, many of those users could not tell you why they liked 4-0 to begin with. 4O wasn't good so much as it was an investment of time. By showing that OpenAI is willing to cut things arbitrarily, users can no longer trust that this investment of time is worthy, especially as many complain that at launch, GPT5 deleted a bunch of conversations. Now OpenAI sits in an odd spot,

where their supposedly huge Manhattan Project-level launch has been met with either apathy or agony. While they've placated users in the short term, it's very clear that the vast majority of users dislike GPT-5, and power users don't seem particularly impressed with it either. This was meant to be the big launch that changed things for Open AI forever, but it's turned into something of a mass betrayal, or just kind of a mass letdown. And because it's based on Vives rather than its actual ability to do something,

there's very little one could do to fix this problem. It's unclear how all of this affects the company long term, but things do not seem good. Samoan has already said that OpenAI is having to reallocate capacity for the next couple of months, prioritizing paying chat GPT users over API demand up from the customer, current allocated capacity and commitments that they've made to their customers, code for those who do not want to pay priority processing, which is now available for any developer. It's also unclear what happens next.

GPT5 is not the future. Open AI is running out of capacity and their product, despite the fanfare has no capabilities or reasons to adopt it that are really new or interesting. Years of allowing the media to spin out ridiculous narratives about what AI can or could do using vague pablum that kind of suggests they're more powerful than they are, has created a PR campaign for a product that does not exist, and the 700 million weekly active users of chat GPT have clearly arrived there without much guidance, the attachment born of compulsion and societal pressure, rather than any real use cases. When you allow people to define an interterminately powerful tool by any standard they like,

with no interest in correcting them, with no interest in guiding them, with no interest in actually showing them what it was that they were paying for, other than it can generate stuff. You'll create an attachment to it that defies any real ability you have to control things. Open AI was never forced to product ties, and at scale it's a very real possibility that people have,

pressure by the media and society itself, forced themselves to find meaning in LLMs. Somehow, even if it feels kind of stupid. And what I mean by this is, you get to the product, and there really isn't that much guidance. Go on an OpenAI's website and have a look at the chat GPT page

and look at what it tells you to do. It's quite vague. You can look at, it can analyze data, right? It can generate stuff. It helps you do ideas. Is that good? Am I smart for using this? Everything else you look at in the software world will tell you what it is you're using it for.

Any consumer-driven software at the very least. Yet, chat GPT's never had to because the media for three years, or two years, I guess, with chat GPT, has kind of just sat there doing the work for them, telling them, oh yeah, you can use it as a powerful personal assistant. Assistant how? To assist me with what? Nasty Kevin Ruse, creepy Kevin in the New York Times a few weeks ago when he did the everyone's using AI piece with Casey Newton. He said that it's a powerful assistant. It's like, for what? You can't do that. This shit can't control my calendar. I don't want it touching my emails. I don't think most people do either. So you've just got people to use it as a shit-dust search engine, an online companion, and a brainstorming thing.

which is a natural way to get people kind of addicted, but addicted to a product you don't truly control and a product you don't truly understand, one that can be swiped by just about anyone. I actually think we're on the kind of downward spiral for this shit. I'm oinking like a pig and squawking like a bird watching this happen. Even core weave is crashing as I record this. They're down 17.91%. Still up too much, though. And I really do think something is shifted thanks to GPT.

I'm excited. And like Dr. Stone's once said, get excited because I think the next few months, like next year is going to be chuckle-heavy. We're going to be whimsy-pilled as we go through the remainder of the AI boom. And I'll be here to guide you through it.

Thanks for listening. Another podcast from some SNL late-night comedy guy, not quite. Unhumor me with Robert Smygel and friends. Me and hilarious guests from Bob Odenkirk to David Letterman help make you funnier. This week, my guest,

S&L's Mikey Day and headwriter Streeter Seidel help an a cappella band with their between songs banter. Where does your group perform? We do some retirement homes. Those people are starving for banter. Listen to humor me with Robert Smigel and friends on the Iheart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

The story I've told myself can then shape my behavior and that can lead me to sabotage the possibility of connection. This Mental Health Awareness Month, Tune into the podcast Deeply Well with Debbie Brown if you've been searching for a soft place to land while doing the work to become whole. This podcast is for you to hear more. Listen to Deeply Well with Debbie Brown

from the Black Effect Podcast Network on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. Why are we all so obsessed with romance? On the Radio 831 podcast, join us Sanjana Basker and Tyler McCall as we unpack all the trending tropes, fuzzy adaptations, book talk drama, and celebrity love stories with hot takes and sharp guests. Each episode digs into what these stories reveal about desire, fantasy, identity, and how we love now.

Listen to the Radio 831 podcast on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Will Ferrell's Big Money Players and IHeart Podcasts presents soccer moms. So I'm Leanne. Yeah. This is my best friend, Janet. Hey. And we have been joined at the hips since high school. Absolutely.

A redacted amount of years later, we're still joined at the hip. Just a little bit bigger hips. This is a podcast. We're recording it as we tailgate our youth soccer games in the back of my Honda Odyssey. With all the snacks and drinks. Why did you get hard seltzer instead of beer? Oh, they hit a bogo. Well, then you got it.

Listen to soccer moms on the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. This is an IHeart podcast. Guaranteed human.