Is ChatGPT a marvel or a farce? We interviewed the chatbot to find out

It’s not often that a new piece of software marks a watershed moment.

But to some, the arrival of ChatGPT seems like one.

The chatbot, designed by the start-up OpenAI, has an uncanny way of mimicking human writing that has astounded some who encountered its prose on social media.

It can write poems about Whataburger in the style of a medieval narrative epic. It can come up with ideas on how to greet comedian Larry David. It can write convincing letters of resignation.

It appears a far leap beyond the customer service chatbots commonly encountered online.

As a result, it has led to fears that artificial intelligence has progressed to a point where it can encroach on work and the arts (along with the usual sci-fi concerns that it could eventually take over the world).

But is this really the Terminator of creative expression?

There are definitely limitations — the bot’s maker acknowledges it will sometimes spit out incorrect or nonsensical answers or decline to answer questions. (Its tendency to produce wrong, but confident-sounding answers led the programming Q&A site Stack Overflow to ban ChatGPT responses.) It’s not supposed to answer what OpenAI deems inappropriate requests, like generating violent or gory content or giving ideas on how to bully others, though the start-up says it’s not foolproof.

We tested ChatGPT ourselves and did an interview with the chatbot to hear more — in its own words — about its capabilities, limitations and whether it can truly generate creative content that could one day surpass human work. Then we brought in experts to analyze ChatGPT’s responses and offer their own perspectives on whether this a landmark technological achievement or