[orange_fritter]

Your thinking is very emotional and shows your inability to understand that "conversational output" is basically an accidental side-effect of a complex tool that just replicates our speech without understanding what it is saying.

Through continuous use, I have found that it does not "reason". That doesn't mean it's not valuable in many ways, and I have found it to be very helpful in a multitude of diverse applications, including helping me reflect on my own life through my own interpretations of its output. It's also a great interface for JSTOR, wikipedia, and basically any language learning.

I'm having a hard time making the jump from "this must be a calculator" to "this must be a philosopher" to be useful. When did we ever have those requirements for a tool?

This tool is just not made for math. Most of its logic processing abilities seem to surpass mine if I am only given 5 minutes to understand a problem. If you understand the tool, you will get the most out of it. Stop anthropomorphizing it, and stop pretending that it can't generate both highly beneficial or highly harmful content simply because it doesn't have a soul/d*ck or whatever.