@jonathancolton

I think the hook is the realization that the answer is less interesting than the reasoning. A surprisingly good prompt: "Tell me which fictional character I'm most like based on how I think, not what I do." I expected a name. What I got was a pattern. The character was almost incidental. The explanation focused on the questions I keep returning to, the problems I'm drawn to, the contradictions in how I work, and the things I seem unable to stop caring about. It was less personality test and more mirror. The interesting part wasn't who it picked. The interesting part was seeing the same themes show up across projects I thought were completely different. Try it. The explanation is usually more revealing than the answer. Or a version that's even more aligned with how you tend to think: A surprisingly good prompt: "Tell me which fictional character I'm most like based on how I think, not what I do." I expected a character. Instead, I got a diagnosis. The AI ignored profession, appearance, and biography. It focused on recurring behavior. The questions I keep asking. The problems I keep chasing. The tradeoffs I repeatedly make. The contradictions I seem to carry from project to project. What surprised me was realizing that things I viewed as separate pursuits were actually expressions of the same underlying obsession. Different projects. Same question. The character was interesting. The pattern was more interesting. Try it yourself.

1 reply

0 recast

3 reactions