ChatGPT is just suppose to “work” for the lay person and it just doesn’t quite often. OpenAI is already being sued by people for stochastic parroting that ended in tragedy. In one case they’ve tried to use the rather novel affirmative defense that they’re not not liable because using ChatGPT for self-harm was against the terms of service the victim agreed to when using the service.
If every building I went to in the US had ramps and elevators even though I'm not in a wheelchair, would it be "fucked up" that the building and architects assume I'm a cripple?
There's just as much meaning in ChatGPT saying "As you said, you have ADHD" as a building having an elevator.
In the training data for ChatGPT, the word ADHD existed and was associated with something that people call each other online, cool. How deep.
Anyway, I do assume very single user of this website, including myself, all have autism (possibly undiagnosed), so do with that information what you will. I'm pretty sure most HN posters make the same assumption.
It’s probably a very human trait to do that but it is a bad habit.
So I'm not entirely surprised that an LLM would start assuming that the user have ADD, because that's what part of it's training data suggests it should.
The issue is it doesn't apply here as it's neither a person or a coherent memory/thinking being.
"Thinking" models are basically just a secondary separately prompted hidden output that prefaces yours so your output is hopefully more aligned to what you want, but there's no magic other than more tokens and trying what works.