The New "I'll provide responses in chunks" UX is a downgrade

[u/PastaPandaSimon]

I find the new "feature" where GPT-6 Thinking starts creating an incomplete answer immediately and then updates it with additional reasoning and information it finds really unreasonably annoying and a downgrade compared to be previous model behavior.

It starts with an incompletely reasoned speculative answer, that then evolves throughout the answer it provides, where the conclusion sometimes does not match the initial information provided.

What's worse, it often introduces bias where the model starts from a wrong conclusion that affects the rest of the answer it builds on top of. But it also introduces immediate bias in the reader who first sees a misleading confident answer, and then has to deal with frequent mini-cognitive dissonances of having to immediately change what they believe based on the updated text as it develops. Even though I recognize it, it still feels annoying to my brain to have to re-convince itself to change its belief about the question all the time.

To make that aspect even less pleasant, it also updates the actual content on the screen as you try to read its interim answer, and you aren't quite sure when it's fully done.

Annoyingly, GPT-6 starts giving me often the wrong answer within seconds, which is completely unnecessary. I would much prefer to wait until it's finished its research and reasoning, and started from a complete correct answer.

I truly wish there was a way to disable this. The old "this is what I've found so far, and this is what I'm doing now" status updates were the far better way to go about it.

This is a bit of a rant, but I wonder how do others feel about it? Because I may be crazy and this actually adds value to everyone else. But even then, I wish there was a way to toggle "start seeding partial response early" vs "provide full, coherent answer once you've finished collecting data and reasoning".

[u/AutoModerator]

Hey /u/PastaPandaSimon,

If your post is a screenshot of a ChatGPT conversation, please reply to this message with the conversation link or prompt.

If your post is a DALL-E 3 image post, please reply with the prompt used to make this image.

Consider joining our public discord server! We have free bots with GPT-4 (with vision), image generators, and more!

🤖

Note: For any ChatGPT-related concerns, email support@openai.com - this subreddit is not part of OpenAI and is not a support channel.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Any_Act_3789]

Je suis assez d'accord. J'ai du mal à comprendre comment le modèle peut produire une réponse juste s'il commence avec une prémisse bancale.

[u/Pasto_Shouwa]

I hate it too, for many reasons. But I feel like this is their new GPT 5.2. It's so annoying that I'd prefer to use GPT 5.6 Sol if the interface to change the model wasn't so unbearable.

[u/DeinFoehn]

I like it.

You can watch it think. If you see it taking a wrong turn or you want to add extra information you can just intervene while it thinks and it will take the new information into it's current research without starting from scratch.

Or, if you don't want to watch it think - just don't? The App will notifiy you when it's done.

[u/PastaPandaSimon → u/DeinFoehn]

So to specify, I like watching it think, and I like the "this is what I found so far, this is what I'm doing now" updates they introduced a while ago. To then get a complete and congruent answer. My point is that this is actually the ideal behavior while research and reasoning are in progress.

What bothers me is the newest functionality they added to Chat where you get a paragraph produced instantly, then another, then another. And it takes turns and meanders because it found new information that often is not consistent with what it already wrote in a previous paragraph. So the answer is disorganised, incongruent, and also is annoying to get new text added to the answer every XX seconds.

[u/DeinFoehn → u/PastaPandaSimon]

But it is exactly that: it's thinking. It is not the answer. just drafts. You sound like you already want to work with those drafts, but thats not what it is meant for. be patient. :D

[u/PastaPandaSimon → u/DeinFoehn]

I think you're describing the past behavior that is still present in " work" mode, which I find very desirable, while my complain is about the new behavior just introduced to Chat.

Chat now produces output that typically does not change, one step at a time, where you get an initial paragraphs representing model's gut feel, then paragraphs are added as it researches and reasons. Instead of updates about progress, you start getting a poorly researched and reasoned answer, then additional paragraphs with its further findings.

It does make me tab out, and come back to read the final conclusion, because I don't trust the content before it anymore.

[u/-Davster-]

Me like.

I’ve never seen it change its answer - in my experience it gives initial partial findings and then expands.

OP hasn’t provided an example.

[u/PastaPandaSimon → u/-Davster-]

My point is that it goes through tangents in the same answer, and the early paragraphs it produces quickly are useless as they are superseded by the following paragraphs, yet remain there as part of the whole answer. Here's an example I could just quickly test. I gave it the following prompt:

"Are there any big GTA clones in development or expected in the coming years? Thinking huge open world games set in modern-ish times".

It immediately gave me the following paragraph:

"Yes. There are several ambitious GTA-style open-world games either in development or recently released, including a couple that are much closer to GTA's concept than you might expect."

Then I got a list of games. 20 seconds later it dug deeper to find out that many of the series have been abandoned or lost funding.

Then it concluded the last paragraph with:

"What stands out to me is the shortage of serious, realistic, contemporary GTA competitors. Major publishers have largely abandoned that particular space..".

Regardless if you watch it work, or tab out to let it finish, it will keep this entire answer as a patchwork of disjointed paragraphs that struggle to make a congruent point until the very end of the answer.

This is in stark contrast with the prior imho desirable behavior (that's still present in "work" mode) where you waited for it to complete the reasoning and research, getting updates along the way of what it was doing, to then get one complete and well-structured answer with reasoning and data points it's discovered.

[u/-Davster- → u/PastaPandaSimon]

Interesting example thanks for sharing!

First, I'd question... have you really not seen the 'changing answer half way through' thing happen before this latest update? I've definitely seen ChatGPT in chat mode give one answer at the start of a response and then seem to contradict itself as it goes on (the "so the better version would be:" shite is so fucking annoying, my god 🤣). Anecdotally it feels to me to happen less now, or at least I haven't noticed an uptick. And the benchmarks suggest that the web search ability is substantially improved now.

Regarding your specific example...

This:

"Yes. There are several ambitious GTA-style open-world games either in development or recently released, including a couple that are much closer to GTA's concept than you might expect."

Is literally logically compatible with this:

"many of the series have been abandoned or lost funding."
-
"What stands out to me is the shortage of serious, realistic, contemporary GTA competitors. Major publishers have largely abandoned that particular space..".

It said there were several - and, it seems there are?

The set of "Serious, realistic, contemporary GTA competitors" involves more restricted criteria than your prompt's "big GTA clones", and the initial "ambitious GTA-style open-world games" quick response - the final sentence reads as ChatGPT's 'commentary' on the list with regard to major publishers, I don't see how it contradicts anything it said earlier.

So... with your given example, I don't really get what you mean - everything it said was 'correct' and coherent as stated, wasn't it?

[u/PastaPandaSimon → u/-Davster-]

We are discussing whether it completely loses cohesion or not, but it is clearly much more disjointed. If at first I see the first paragraph, I get an impression that the market on GTA clones is doing great. But by the time I actually see the summary, the message is that it's not doing so great.

In contrast with the "work" / 5.6 behavior, where you see the thinking steps, but then the response comes with the more accurate answer from the get go, then evidence, then summary. It does not take twists and turns like this - you get a whole output trying to paint a complete picture. I think that's the more desirable user experience.

Especially as I don't see producing partial outputs that don't paint an accurate picture yet as producing much value. It's not the answer I was looking for yet as it has not done research and reasoning yet, so why mislead or at least waste users time reading it, instead of just producing the correct, more concise and cohesive answer once done? I argue that it's the superior way to do it. Especially since there's already an effort toggle, accommodating everyone who values quick responses over reasoning effort.

[u/avid-shrug → u/-Davster-]

Isn’t that OP’s point? That it should be able to change its answer

[u/-Davster- → u/avid-shrug]

I mean, OP did literally say:

"...GPT-6 Thinking starts creating an incomplete answer immediately and then updates it..."

and

"It starts with an incompletely reasoned speculative answer, that then evolves throughout the answer it provides, where the conclusion sometimes does not match the initial information provided."

and

"...it also updates the actual content on the screen as you try to read its interim answer..."

....

So, I don't read OP's point as being that it "should be able to change its answer" - part of OPs complaint seems to literally be that it does 'change its answer'.

When I said "I've never seen it change its answer", I meant in the sense of it not changing the substantive answer. It gives certain information and then expands - I've not personally noticed a sudden increase in it stating incorrect things that it then does a 180 on, or it getting locked-in on a wrong answer.

[u/HookedMermaid]

You can go back to 5.6, the rollout of 6 doesn’t signal the retirement of 5.6.

Also, the responses output was actually changed entirely in 6.

If you look at the backend (the code output), you can see that it prints every… single… line… even in replies where it doesn’t pause and think, it’s print style is line by line.

Previously, you’d get a longer period of thinking, and then it’d print everything in a block.

[u/PastaPandaSimon → u/HookedMermaid]

Yes I know I can use 5.6, for now, until it's gone. While this discussed behaviour is new, imho undesirable, and there is a risk it stays in Chat. I worry it will further normalize "if you want great answers from start to finish that are well reasoned first, use Work".

[u/Lloydian64]

Everyone has a preference.

Previous method was more of a stream of consciousness type thing. Remember that it wasn’t trying to answer your question so much as outputting the words that were most likely to be appropriate, and it didn’t necessarily consider the final answer. In other words, it represents thoughtfulness. That’s not necessarily a bad thing.

But if your preference is that it hold off on providing an answer until it has been fully considered, tell it that’s what you want. It’s remarkably compliant.