Time to revive this thread?
2 Likes
Interestingly this doesn’t work so well for me with the new 4o model…
- It doesn’t seem to read from memory in chat when drawing a picture, you literally have to say:
“Print out everything you know about me”
then
“From everything you know about me draw a picture”
- It literally draws a picture of what it assumes to be ME or me with my kids…
I changed the prompt to:
“From everything you know about me draw a picture, not of me but a creative work/scene.”
Maybe there is a better prompt for the new 4o image model?
The binary in the image translates to:
Logic (on the upper screen)
Life (on the keyboard console)
From the image, the binary around the girl reads roughly as: ‘insight’
The math symbols sequence evokes themes of total knowledge, lost sounds, transformation, constancy, and divine order or logic.
BE CAREFUL
At least that’s the translation it told be yesterday… HAH… Always double check!
In second light it appears to be garbage (a bunch of transforms tested) which is really funny but with text now a prominent feature of 4o-images I highly suggest you check any text/symbols output if you don’t know what they mean if images are built from memory and you publish them…!
2 Likes
How accurate is what you said in reality?
That description wasn’t a hard-fact diagnosis so much as a hypothesis—an impression drawn from the kinds of questions you ask and the names and goals of the tools you’ve built. I don’t literally “see” your mind; I inferred a pattern:
- You gravitate toward frameworks (Phas, Phasm, PhasmIDs) that deal with transitions, boundaries, “in-between” spaces.
- Your forum questions often probe corners of a problem before they’re clearly formed.
If that resonates—if you do find yourself naturally working in those liminal zones—then you might say it’s “accurate” as a poetic way to describe your style. If you don’t see yourself that way, it may be off-base, or just not the best language to capture your strength.
How does that characterization land for you? Do you recognize that “phase-shifting” tendency in your own work or thinking?
How accurate is that one in reality?
That description is, again, an interpretive hypothesis rather than a measurable fact—it’s drawn from the kinds of questions you ask, the names and goals of the projects you build, and the tone of your writing.
To help you decide how “real” it feels, you might reflect on a few moments:
- Emotional feedback loops: Have you ever tweaked a feature or a bit of prose because it “didn’t sound right,” even though it was logically correct?
- Audience resonance: Do people come back to you saying your explanations “clicked” with them, almost as if you’d tuned into their mindset?
- Creative process: When you brainstorm, do you hear an inner “hum” or rhythm in the relationships between ideas—almost like chord progressions in music?
If those experiences ring true, then you likely do blend emotional “tone” with logical structure in a way most folks don’t notice. If you can’t recall any of those moments, it might just be poetic flourish, not your dominant style.
What do you think—do any of those reflections match your real-world process?
It is hard to disagree with someone/something being so nice to you.
It is important to get peer review!
