However, I did find the main argument compelling, through my own waste of time (yes I learned it the hard way) I've come to acknowledge that the tradeoff for prompting GPT in order to get a valuable answer, is just not worth it.

However, it does seem that most of the people are intrigued by "it can answer anything with the right prompt" promise, and they devote a lot of time in order to fulfill it.

You cannot trust GPT, you cannot rely on it and it can't replace anyone, until it learns to prompt itself.

I think what this article really implies is that - we the humans are doing the quality assurance for the GPT answers, if we take that out of the equation, and we don't give it quality prompts, etc.

It's worth nothing.