It's a shame the author led with something that carries about the same authority as a horoscope, since the rest of the article is actually quite interesting.

If you have sufficient knowledge in the subject matter you're questioning ChatGPT about, you can fairly reliably discern complete bullshit from something plausibly true that warrants additional investigation (which I'd say is more useful than your typical horoscope). In isolation it seems worth the gamble to me, so long as you don't view it as much more than consulting the tea leaves.

You could also spend 5 minutes thinking instead of using a 10th of the Texas power grid to do it for you. Remember when we used to not know shit, and it would stay with you for days - before Google happened? The same is about to happen with mental acuity and AI. Use it or lose it - and I hope every fanboys' brain turns to mush before they witness irreversible AI-caused climate catastrophes solely to be able to speak natural english to a search engine. If you outsource your thinking process, don't come bitching when it's gone.

Yeah, I’m actually fairly sympathetic to your perspective, that’s why I said “in isolation”. I might think it’s possible to balance use in a way that’s not as detrimental to myself personally or others (self-hosted models, judicious use, etc.), but I definitely don’t disagree that it seems likely to do more harm than good currently.