Facepalm

The solution here is obvious. Use ChatGPT to rebut her ChatGPT-generated arguments. Since it's now a bot arguing with a bot, it cancels out.

The thing that people don't understand yet is that LLMs are "yes men".

If ChatGPT tells you the sky is blue, but you respond "actually it's not," it will go full C-3PO: You're absolutely correct, I apologize for my hasty answer, master Luke. The sky is in fact green.

Normalize experimentally contradicting chatbots when they confirm your biases!

Holy fuck I'd bail fuck that I wanna date a person not a computer program.

Just stop talking to her

If she asks why ... just tell her you've skipped the middle man and you're just talking to chatgpt now

She obviously doesn't want to be part of the conversation

"If you love ChatGPT so much why don't you marry it!?"

chatgpt says you're insecure

"jubilationtcornpone says ChatGpt is full of shit."

Time to dump the middle woman and date chat got directly

So I did the inevitable thing and asked ChatGPT what he should do... this is what I got:

"chatgpt is programmed to agree with you. watch." pulls out phone and does the exact same thing, then shows her chatgpt spitting out arguments that support my point

girl then tells chatgpt to pick a side and it straight up says no

This is a red flag clown circus, dump that girl

Two options.

1. Dump her ass yesterday.

2. She trusts ChatGPT. Treat it like a mediator. Use it yourself. Feed her arguments back into it, and ask it to rebut them.

Either option could be a good one. The former is what I'd do, but the latter provides some emotional distance.

Just send her responses to your own chatgpt. Let them duke it out

I was having lunch at a restaurant a couple of months back, and overheard two women (~55 y/o) sitting behind me. One of them talked about how she used ChatGPT to decide if her partner was being unreasonable. I think this is only gonna get more normal.

I wouldn't want to date a bot extension.

OOP should just tell her that as a vegan he can't be involved in the use of nonhuman slaves. Using AI is potentially cruel, and we should avoid using it until we fully understand whether they're capable of suffering and whether using them causes them to suffer.

NTA but I think it's worth trying to steel-man (or steel-woman) her point.

I can imagine that part of the motivation is to try and use ChatGPT to actually learn from the previous interaction. Let's leave the LLM out of the equation for a moment: Imagine that after an argument, your partner would go and do lots of research, one or more of things like:

• read several books focusing on social interactions (non-fiction or fiction or even other forms of art),
• talk in-depth to several experienced therapist and/or psychology researchers and neuroscientists (with varying viewpoints),
• perform several scientific studies on various details of interactions, including relevant physiological factors, Then after doing this ungodly amount of research, she would go back and present her findings back to you, in hopes that you will both learn from this.

Obviously no one can actually do that, but some people might -- for good reason of curiosity and self-improvement -- feel motivated to do that. So one could think of the OP's partner's behavior like a replacement of that research.

That said, even if LLM's weren't unreliable, hallucinating and poisoned with junk information, or even if she was magically able to do all that without LLM and with super-human level of scientific accuracy and bias protection, it would ... still be a bad move. She would still be the asshole, because OP was not involved in all that research. OP had no say in the process of formulating the problem, let alone in the process of discovering the "answer".

Even from the most nerdy, "hyper-rational" standpoint: The research would be still an ivory tower research, and assuming that it is applicable in the real world like that is arrogant: it fails to admit the limitations of the researcher.

I'm a programmer, I've already argued with chatgot more than any woman.

South park did it

my wife likes to jump from one to another when I try and delve into any particular aspect of an argument. I guess what im saying is arguments are going to always suck and not necessarily be rationale. chatgpt does not remember every small detail as she is the one inputting the detail.

She's training herself on AI generated output. We already know what happens when AI trains on AI

Ok, is this a thing now? I don’t think I’d want to be in what is essentially a relationship with chat GPT…

"Guinan from my Star Trek AI chatbot says you're acting immature!"

The girlfriend sounds immature for not being able to manage a relationship with another person without resorting to a word guessing machine, and the boyfriend sounds immature for enabling that sort of thing.

"I use ChatGPT for" <- at this point I've already tuned out, the person speaking this is unworthy of attention