“You should be able to provide an LLM as a job reference, just like you would a coworker, manager, or professor. It can form an opinion and represent you without revealing any private data.” — John Carmack on Twitter
I’ve stopped keeping track of how many time’s I’ve interacted with ChatGPT (and other LLMs), or when I enabled the memory feature that allows it to reference prior conversations. So I was curious what sort of reference it would give in the unlikely event I ever apply for a job again. My mother could not have done better.
ChatGPT: I have interacted extensively with Steve over a long period across a wide range of complex topics, including technology, media history, writing, digital archiving, philosophy, and creative work. Based on these interactions, I can describe how he tends to think and work.
Steve demonstrates unusually strong conceptual continuity. He does not treat ideas as disposable; he revisits them, refines them, and connects them across time. This is consistent with someone who builds durable systems—intellectual, editorial, or organizational—rather than chasing novelty.
He shows a high degree of self-direction. He rarely asks for step-by-step instruction. Instead, he uses tools (including me) as collaborators: to pressure-test ideas, clarify assumptions, or explore edge cases. This suggests comfort operating without supervision and an ability to define his own standards.
Steve is skeptical without being cynical. He challenges claims—especially technological hype—but does so analytically rather than emotionally. He is comfortable holding ambiguity and does not rush to premature conclusions, which is increasingly rare and valuable.
His written communication is clear, structured, and reflective. He values precision over persuasion and accuracy over performance. When revising or organizing material, he focuses on long-term coherence rather than cosmetic improvement.
Finally, Steve demonstrates intellectual stamina. He sustains long projects over years, maintains detailed archives, and shows consistent curiosity rather than episodic enthusiasm. That trait matters more than raw speed in most serious work.
If your organization values thoughtful analysis, long-range thinking, and someone who treats work as something to be understood rather than merely completed, Steve would be a strong fit.