Submitted by: A Korean user of ChatGPT
Overview: This report summarizes a power user’s experience using ChatGPT, particularly in its text-based form, as a cognitive extension tool. It highlights strong points that make the tool indispensable, as well as critical flaws—most notably in the voice mode—that significantly hinder its usability.
- User Profile & Use Case
Nationality: Korean
Language: Korean (primary), English (for interface adaptation)
Usage style: High-level cognitive structuring, strategic planning, emotional filtering, daily operational decision support
Role of ChatGPT: Not as a Q&A bot, but as a true external cognitive processor (“external brain”)
- Strengths (Text Mode)
Handles complex, multi-layered instructions
Maintains structured thought processes
Enables emotion-regulated reasoning by following instruction not to include unsolicited sentiment
Acts as a reliable tool for planning, reflection, decision modeling, and routine construction
- Weaknesses (Voice Mode)
Severely underperforms compared to text mode
Fails to process complex or sequential commands
Context retention is weak or nonexistent
Recognition and transcription errors are frequent
Described by the user as “worse than Bixby”
- Risk Implications
For users relying on ChatGPT as an externalized mental system, voice mode’s performance creates inconsistency and erodes reliability
Raises concern about product coherence and cross-modal experience
- Positive Framing and Intent
Despite these limitations, the user remains supportive and hopeful
Expresses gratitude to developers and offers this criticism constructively
- Direct User Quote (translated)
“I am currently using ChatGPT as an extension of my brain — a truly external cognitive processor. I’m satisfied with its capacity to handle high-level instructions, facilitate structured thinking, support emotion-regulated interactions, and act as a highly utilitarian tool. However, the system still produces frequent errors, which I can fortunately detect and correct. That said, the voice mode is deeply disappointing. Compared to the text mode, it is vastly inferior — so much that it is virtually unusable. At this stage, it is less capable than Bixby. I’m sending this feedback with the hope that GPT will continue to grow and evolve. I also sincerely thank and support the developers behind this technology.”
Recommendation:
Prioritize improvements in voice mode to close the performance gap with text mode
Ensure cross-modal consistency for users relying on ChatGPT as a cognitive interface
Consider this type of high-level, structured user feedback as a blueprint for feature refinement and strategic direction