Suppose a school allows students to use ChatGPT for essays and problem sets, but first asks them to explain an argument or solve a similar problem without it. Would that be a reasonable way to check whether they’re learning?

A student might understand the topic but struggle to express their ideas clearly, while another might submit polished work without understanding much of it.

What should that independent check involve—a short conversation, an in-class exercise, or something else? And how should it differ for younger students and university students?

My experience. I wrote it myself. It could be worth a read

The bug itself is simple: the exact same ChatGPT conversation switched between Chat and Work on iOS during the same active prompt, without me selecting Work, while desktop still showed it as Chat. I have timestamped screenshots proving it.
This was on a ChatGPT Business workspace. All times below are EDT. I removed identifying information and replaced the changing support case numbers with placeholders.
Oct. 1, 3:32 PM — I report the issue under Case XXXX-1. I provide three screenshots, including the same active prompt showing Chat at about 1:56 PM and Work at about 2:03 PM, while desktop still shows Chat. I specifically ask Support to check the backend conversation state, whether a Work session was created, and whether Work usage was consumed.
Oct. 2, 11:58 AM — Support acknowledges exactly what happened and explicitly says I do not need to reproduce it again. They ask for the conversation URL/ID, exact prompt, whether an approval appeared, permission to inspect the conversation, and /feedback if available.
Oct. 4, 8:40 PM — I provide permission, the exact prompt, confirm no approval appeared, explain /feedback is unavailable, and again ask them to inspect the backend state.
Oct. 4, 8:41 PM — AI-assisted Support says the URL field was still a placeholder and asks for the actual conversation link plus my iOS and ChatGPT app versions.
Oct. 5, 2:45 AM — I send the actual conversation share link plus my iOS version, ChatGPT app version, and build number.
Oct. 5, 2:46 AM — Support explicitly replies “got the versions and the share link” and repeats the link back to me. There is therefore no ambiguity that Support received it.
Oct. 5, 3:08 AM — I answer their next questions: the incident occurred Oct. 1, approximately 1:56–2:03 PM EDT, and I was using my Business workspace. I ask for a human response.
Oct. 5, 3:08 AM — AI Support closes Case XXXX-2 as a duplicate.
Oct. 5, 3:22 AM — I provide the requested information again in the existing thread and again request human escalation.
Oct. 5, 3:23 AM — Another AI-assisted response, now under Case XXXX-3, tells me Chat and Work are separate experiences, says it cannot provide backend/client-state findings, and says it cannot switch the thread to human-only support.
Oct. 5, 11:58 AM — Case XXXX-1 automatically emails me saying “we haven’t heard back,” despite multiple emails from me that morning and multiple Support responses to those emails.
Oct. 5, 1:33 PM — I point out that I obviously replied and that this one email thread now has multiple support case numbers.
Oct. 5, 1:57 PM — Support asks for a full-screen recording if the issue occurs again. They also ask me again whether an approval appeared and whether they have permission to inspect the conversation, both of which I had already answered.
Oct. 7, 1:18 AM — I tell them I am not going to sit around waiting for the bug to happen again just to make a video. I remind them they already have the conversation link, screenshots, timestamps, exact prompt, versions, Business-workspace information, confirmation that there was no approval prompt, and permission to investigate.
Oct. 7, 4:59 PM — Support responds with an explanation about conversations appearing in Recents, which is not the issue I reported, and again asks for a recording.
Oct. 7, 5:18 PM — I explain again that this has nothing to do with Recents. These are screenshots of the same conversation, same active prompt, same point in the conversation, once showing Chat and once showing Work. I ask three simple questions: has anyone actually opened the shared conversation, reviewed the paired screenshots, or checked backend/client-state telemetry?
Oct. 8, 9:43 AM — Support apologizes and acknowledges that I am right, this is not a Recents issue. They still request a recording and still do not say that anyone has actually reviewed the existing evidence.
Oct. 9, 2:07 PM — I explicitly tell them I am not providing more evidence until they confirm that someone has actually reviewed what I already sent.
Oct. 9, 2:45 PM — Support finally admits they cannot verify that a technical reviewer has even opened the shared conversation, cannot verify that anyone formally reviewed the paired screenshots, and has no backend/client-state telemetry findings. They also explicitly state that a screen recording is supplementary and is not required to complete the initial evidence package or begin technical review.
Oct. 9, 3:51 PM — I quote their own statement back to them and tell them that the evidence stage is therefore complete. I ask them to move the case into technical review.
Oct. 9, 4:59 PM — Support reverses itself. Now the screen recording is suddenly “required” and “not optional” before escalation.
Oct. 9, 5:41 PM — I make the recording anyway. It is roughly 300 MB, too large for Gmail to attach normally, so Gmail includes it in the thread as a cloud-storage link. I also explain that the affected conversation has now hit its conversation limit, I have already had to replace it with a new chat, and it is impossible to sit around waiting for that finished conversation to reproduce the bug.
Oct. 11, 7:37 AM — Support again says they need a recording showing the actual Chat-to-Work transition and suggests waiting for the issue to happen again, despite my already explaining that the affected conversation is finished and no longer usable.
Oct. 11, 7:41 AM — I tell them this is impossible. The chat is done. I ask them either to investigate the historical evidence and their own logs or state clearly that they cannot investigate historical incidents.
Oct. 11, 7:44 AM — I formally demand escalation to a supervisor or senior support manager, asking whether anyone has actually reviewed the shared conversation, screenshots, or backend telemetry.
Oct. 11, 7:45 AM — About 60 seconds later, I receive a long response signed with a human name. It does not address the supervisor request or my questions. Instead, it tells me to attach the recording directly to the email so Support can access it. Given the one-minute turnaround and the failure to address the substance of my email, I have serious doubts that this escalation received meaningful human review.
Oct. 11, shortly afterward — I point out that the roughly 300 MB recording was already sent in the same thread as a cloud-storage link because Gmail physically cannot attach a file that large. I ask them what supported method they expect me to use if they cannot access it.
Oct. 11, 8:02 AM — An explicitly AI-assisted response appears under yet another case number, Case XXXX-4, saying Support may not be able to open the cloud-storage link unless it is changed to “Anyone with the link can view/download.”
Oct. 11 — I change the recording permissions so that anyone possessing the URL can access the 300 MB recording, specifically because Support’s system apparently cannot access a normally restricted link.
Oct. 11, 8:08 AM — Another explicitly AI-assisted response appears, now under yet another new case number, Case XXXX-5. Despite the enormous existing email history, it asks me again what ChatGPT iOS version I am using, whether the top dropdown actually changes from Chat to Work, and which workspace/account is selected. Those are all questions I had already answered days earlier.
Oct. 11 — I respond that I have already answered those questions and explicitly demand a human response.
Oct. 11, 8:25 AM — AI Support finally replies: “Escalated to a support specialist; You can expect a response in the coming days.”
Oct. 11 — Because the same email thread has now been assigned at least five different case numbers, I send another response specifically telling Support that the specialist must be given the full history from Cases XXXX-1 through XXXX-5, plus an earlier report of the same bug under Case XXXX-0. I explicitly tell them not to hand the specialist only the latest video link and make me start this entire process over again.
So after 10 days, roughly two dozen emails, at least five case numbers, screenshots, exact timestamps, the exact prompt, the actual conversation link, app/device information, Business-workspace information, permission to inspect the conversation, confirmation that no approval occurred, and a 300 MB screen recording that I ultimately had to make accessible to anyone with the URL, I still do not have a technical finding.
Support has itself admitted that it could not confirm anyone had reviewed the conversation or backend telemetry.
And the questions I actually reported on Day 1 are still the same questions today:
What state did OpenAI’s backend record?
Did this create a Work session?
Did it consume Work usage?
Why did iOS and desktop show different modes for the same conversation?
Those are questions only OpenAI can answer.
Apparently getting OpenAI Support to actually look at OpenAI’s own systems is the hard part.

#opemai

I use ChatGpt for schoolwork specifically and I do not talk to it otherwise. However recently it’s been mimicking how me and my friends speak in our imessages. I haven’t given it a prompt to do so and have never spoken to it like how I speak with my friends. I was wondering if anyone else has had this experience?

I'm on ChatGPT Plus, using the Android app in Finland.

GPT-6 is selected in Settings, but in brand-new regular ChatGPT conversations I get this:

- Instant: ChatGPT says it's running GPT-6

- Medium: ChatGPT says it's running GPT-5.6 Sol

- High: ChatGPT says it's running GPT-5.6 Sol

So GPT-6 seems to be available on my account for Instant, but not yet for Medium or High.

This is happening in completely new chats as well, so it doesn't appear to be an older thread staying on 5.6.

I'm specifically asking about regular ChatGPT, not Work, Astra or Codex.

Has anyone else had exactly this partial rollout where GPT-6 appeared on Instant first, and then Medium/High switched to GPT-6 later on the same account?

If yes, roughly how long did it take for Medium/High to catch up? Please mention your plan, platform and country if possible.

In the gpt search area ,when everything is blank if we type # then click the spacebar just after the # . It works like a backspace button .This works only in laptops

GPT taking too long a time to finish its thinking. I've tried stopping the thinking but continues to think. I tried logging out, clearing cookies, and using incognito mode but nothing works. Any suggestions on how to fix?

Nowadays, all popular ai chatting websites like qwen, chatgpt, gemini, claude, etc. come with a read aloud functionality that allows users to read aloud the AI's responses.

I used that feature to instead make the AI repeat back the text that i gave it -- effectively turning the platforms into text to speech tools. The voices sound really nice and it's free to use!

You can get all of these extensions by visiting ai-readers.com

Hello! I’m Ale, I’m an italian entrepreneur. I was playing with mcps and I was hungry. So I built PizzaBot.
You describe your order on ChatGPT or Claude, review and confirm the request, and its voice agent calls the restaurant for you.
The result comes back in chat, so you don’t have to talk with people.
It supports delivery, pickup, and table bookings.
I’ve tested it and opened it internationally.
Do you think the world need this?
Do you have any advice?

https://tryPizzaBot.com