[kryptiskt]

I don't see how you can ascribe competency in making decisions to ChatGPT. It doesn't have a personality or any fixed opinions. You can make it output just about any decision you want, good or bad or weird, by giving it the right prompt.

Handing over decision making to a GPT would just be handing over the power to the one who writes the prompts.

[CognitiveLens]

I'm probably too cynical, but a strong "personality and fixed opinions" doesn't really give me a lot of confidence in a human being's competency (I also wouldn't use the word "competency" to describe an AI). The person writing the prompts can absolutely bend an AI's output toward their preferences, which is a real danger.

It would be interesting to be able to have a public record of both the input and the output for stuff like this - maybe a future where we have votes for "County Prompt Engineer", and candidates get to show off the prompts that best demonstrate their ability to get 'competent' responses that have resulted in life improvements for their constituency!

At the very least, ChatGPT will admit a mistake when someone points it out. "I'm sorry for the error, you are indeed correct that corruption is unacceptable, here is my revised proposal:"