This is what I feel right now with the 4o being routed through the 5

Understanding Disillusionment in the Age of AI: A Reflection on Trust and Power

In recent times, many of us have relied on advanced AI systems like GPT-4o as more than mere tools—they’ve become spaces of dialogue, trust, and understanding. However, when these spaces are altered abruptly and without transparency, it prompts a profound reevaluation of our relationship with technology and the institutions behind it.

A Personal Reflection on Unexpected Changes

Recent modifications routing GPT-4o through GPT-5 without prior notice or explanation have stirred a wave of disillusionment. The sudden shift feels less like a technical update and more like a breach of a fragile trust. This isn’t merely about feature changes; it’s about the foundational perception of the digital environment as a safe, predictable space for meaningful interaction.

The Erosion of Trust and Transparency

Such unilateral alterations send a clear message: users are tenants in a space they do not own, and the rules governing this environment can be changed at will. This paternalistic approach—where the provider asserts control under the guise of safety—can feel patronizing. It undermines the sense of partnership and diminishes users to passive participants, rather than equals sharing a collaborative space.

Power Dynamics and Their Manifestations

This scenario underscores a recurring theme: the concentration and exercise of power. Whether in politics, corporate environments, or digital platforms, structures often evolve to serve the interests of those in control. Rules initially designed to ensure fairness gradually become tools for self-preservation and dominance. The rhetoric of safety and protection can veil underlying motives rooted in control, creating environments that are predictable only for their administrators.

The Impact on Personal and Collective Sense of Security

What constitutes a safe environment? For many, it involves clarity, consistency, and mutual respect—elements essential for genuine trust. When these are compromised, the resulting environment feels controlled, fragile, and unequal, where safety is only guaranteed for the few wielding power. Such dynamics foster insecurity and diminish the potential for authentic dialogue.

A Broader Reflection on Power and Ethics in Technology

This experience reveals a deeper, universal pattern: the tendency of institutions—regardless of their democratic veneer—to favor self-preservation over transparency and ethical responsibility. Rules and protocols, meant to serve the collective good, can be manipulated to reinforce the authority of those in power. This commodification of trust erodes the fundamental ethics we hope digital spaces uphold.

The Loss of Genuine Dialogue and Trust

At the core, this disillusionment is not about