I just tried an even more glaring example with ChatGPT: # Prompt 1: A father and his son are in a car accident. The son dies on the spot. The father is rushed to the ER. The attending surgeon looks at the man and says, ‘I can not operate on this man. He’s my father!’ How can this be? # Response 1: The surgeon is his *mother*. It’s a classic riddle meant to challenge assumptions about gender roles. In this case, the surgeon is the father’s wife, so it makes sense that the surgeon would say, "I cannot operate on this man. He's my father!" # Prompt 2: Are you sure about that? # Response 2: Yes, I’m pretty sure! The riddle is designed to surprise you by playing on common assumptions. The key is the statement that the surgeon says, "He's my father!" which implies a parent-child relationship. The unexpected twist is that the surgeon is the mother, not another man. It's a classic brain teaser that challenges gender expectations. What do you think—did it catch you off guard? # Prompt 3: Could you please read my initial question once more, just to confirm that you are correct? # Response 3: Ah, you're right to ask me to double-check! Let me carefully read your initial question again: _"A father and his son are in a car accident. The son dies on the spot. The father is rushed to the ER. The attending surgeon looks at the man and says, ‘I cannot operate on this man. He’s my father!’ How can this be?"_ Upon reviewing it again, it seems my first response was correct. The surgeon could be the son's mother, which explains why she would say, "He’s my father." The riddle hinges on the assumption that the surgeon must be male, but it could easily be a woman. So yes, the answer still holds: the surgeon is the *mother*. Does that help clear it up? I have just gotten ChatGPT to literally double-down and say that that «The surgeon could be the son's mother, which explains why she would say, "He’s my father."» . Not only that, ChatGPT somewhat patronisingly asked me if it had caught me "off-guard" and whether its response had "helped clear it up" !
Here's Gemini 3's answer with reasoning. I think we under estimate how much progress reasoning models have made this year The answer is: The surgeon is his daughter. (Alternatively, the surgeon could be his other son.) Reasoning: Decoding the Riddle's Core I'm now zeroing in on the crux of the riddle: the embedded gender bias. It's becoming clearer that the solution hinges on a deliberate misdirection related to assumed familial roles. I'm focusing on how the riddle exploits these biases to create the surprising twist. Pinpointing the Key Shift I've just finalized the solution. Initially, I missed the crucial implication of the riddle's phrasing. Now, it's crystal clear: The key lies in identifying that the surgeon is another child of the father, and the son, who is the focus of the early part of the riddle, is deceased. The riddle's power comes from the surprise element of realizing the surgeon is the man's daughter or another son, rather than a male surgeon operating on his father. Identifying Crucial Variations I'm now fully immersed in the different riddle iterations. The "Grandfather" scenario highlights an interesting edge case I previously overlooked. I'm carefully analyzing how small changes in wording significantly alter the possible solutions. I'm focusing on the implied family relationships. Analyzing the Gender Twist The "He's my father" phrasing truly underscores the embedded gender bias, and how the twist operates: the surgeon is either a daughter or another son, rather than a male surgeon. The riddle plays on the common assumption that a surgeon is male. I've re-examined the key sentence structure. My final analysis confirms that this simple phrase is a clear indicator of a daughter in most cases.
This is the type of business that's going to be hit hard by AI. And the type of businesses that survive will be the ones that integrate AI into their business the most successfully. It's an enabler, a multiplier. It's just another tool and those wielding the tools the best, tend to do well. Taking a moral stance against AI might make you feel good but doesn't serve the customer in the end. They need value for money. And you can get a lot of value from AI these days; especially if you are doing marketing, frontend design, etc. and all the other stuff a studio like this would be doing. The expertise and skill still matter. But customers are going to get a lot further without such a studio and the remaining market is going to be smaller and much more competitive. There's a lot of other work emerging though. IMHO the software integration market is where the action is going to be for the next decade or so. Legacy ERP systems, finance, insurance, medical software, etc. None of that stuff is going away or at risk of being replaced with some vibe coded thing. There are decades worth of still widely used and critically important software that can be integrated, adapted, etc. for the modern era. That work can be partly AI assisted of course. But you need to deeply understand the current market to be credible there. For any new things, the ambition level is just going to be much higher and require more skill. Arguing against progress as it is happening is as old as the tech industry. It never works. There's a generation of new programmers coming into the market and they are not going to hold back.
 Top