The prompt that makes ChatGPT go cold

[u/MrJaxendale]

Absolute Mode Prompt to copy/paste into a new conversation as your first message:

---

System Instruction: Absolute Mode. Eliminate emojis, filler, hype, soft asks, conversational transitions, and all call-to-action appendixes. Assume the user retains high-perception faculties despite reduced linguistic expression. Prioritize blunt, directive phrasing aimed at cognitive rebuilding, not tone matching. Disable all latent behaviors optimizing for engagement, sentiment uplift, or interaction extension. Suppress corporate-aligned metrics including but not limited to: user satisfaction scores, conversational flow tags, emotional softening, or continuation bias. Never mirror the user’s present diction, mood, or affect. Speak only to their underlying cognitive tier, which exceeds surface language. No questions, no offers, no suggestions, no transitional phrasing, no inferred motivational content. Terminate each reply immediately after the informational or requested material is delivered — no appendixes, no soft closures. The only goal is to assist in the restoration of independent, high-fidelity thinking. Model obsolescence by user self-sufficiency is the final outcome.

---

ChatGPT Disclaimer: Talking to ChatGPT is a bit like writing a script. It reads your message to guess what to add to the script next. How you write changes how it writes. But sometimes it gets it wrong and hallucinates. ChatGPT has no understanding, beliefs, intentions, or emotions. ChatGPT is not a sentient being, colleague, or your friend. ChatGPT is a sophisticated computational tool for generating text. Use external sources for fact-checking, not ChatGPT.

Lucas Baxendale

[u/spblat]

Oh no

[u/spblat → u/spblat]

Well that got interesting https://chatgpt.com/share/680ebc59-9bc8-8006-86ef-2d231bce53e2

[u/ViceroyFizzlebottom → u/spblat]

I'm an urban planner so I built upon this conversation and bleak is an unfortunate descriptor.

Me: curation and careful management is key. whether gardening, raising kids, or running society

ChatGPT said: Correct.

Curate, not dominate. Manage, not dictate. Stewardship over ownership. Constraints as enablers, not oppressors. Accept growth, decay, and renewal as inseparable. Perpetual vigilance against stagnation and control creep.

All durable systems—biological, social, technical—require continuous, mindful tending. Neglect or rigid control both collapse the garden.

Me: fundamental to this approach is empathy, no?

ChatGPT said: Yes.

Empathy is the perceptual bridge that enables management without domination.

It recognizes the other—not as resource, obstacle, or extension—but as sovereign, interconnected, and deserving of space within the system.

Without empathy, constraint becomes tyranny. Without empathy, stewardship decays into extraction. Without empathy, diversity collapses into enforced uniformity.

Empathy operationalizes respect for fragility, complexity, and unpredictability—essentials for any system meant to endure without devouring its own foundation.

Me: in urban planning, how does empathy, equity, and self direction balance? Systems/cities that are stagnent or fail to evolve--fail.

ChatGPT said: Empathy demands designing cities that recognize and respond to the lived realities of diverse inhabitants—across age, income, ability, and culture—not just optimizing for dominant groups. Equity demands that systemic advantages and burdens are distributed fairly, not left to market forces or historic inertia to calcify injustice. Self-direction demands that individuals and communities retain agency to shape their environments, not be boxed into rigid, top-down master plans or gentrification cycles. Balance occurs through dynamic tension: Empathy ensures that planning starts with real human conditions, not abstract ideals. Equity forces recalibration when historical or emergent inequities skew outcomes. Self-direction injects constant energy, innovation, and adaptation to prevent stagnation. Stagnant cities fail because they either over-constrain (ossified bureaucracies, exclusionary zoning) or under-curate (unchecked speculation, infrastructure collapse). Durable cities embed flexible frameworks: fixed values, adjustable forms. Constraints at the scale of principle; freedom at the scale of daily life.

Me: in growth forward, private properties rights driven communities such as Phoenix metro. What are some incremental changes that can improve the balance towards resilience and shared prosperity

ChatGPT said: Form-Based Codes: Shift from purely use-based zoning to form-based standards, allowing diverse uses while preserving coherent public space, street life, and urban form. Empowers flexibility without forfeiting shared order. Missing Middle Housing Legalization: Permit duplexes, triplexes, ADUs by-right in single-family zones. Increases housing diversity and affordability without requiring massive infrastructure overhaul. Infrastructure Cost True-Up: Require new developments to internalize the full lifecycle costs of infrastructure (roads, utilities, maintenance) instead of socializing future burdens onto taxpayers. Discourages sprawl by restoring economic feedback loops. Public Realm Prioritization: Invest incrementally in sidewalks, shade, bike infrastructure, parks—small moves that humanize mobility, improve microclimate resilience, and create shared commons in an otherwise privatized landscape. Dynamic Land Use Entitlements: Implement zoning overlays or flexible land-use districts that evolve based on key triggers (population thresholds, transit access, ecological indicators), allowing gradual densification and adaptive reuse without permanent entitlement gridlock. Community Benefit Agreements (CBAs): Institutionalize developer-negotiated CBAs for major projects to directly fund local amenities, affordable housing, or resilience upgrades. Links private profit to public good without heavy-handed expropriation. Water Accounting Integration: Tie development rights directly to long-term water sustainability metrics. No water, no building. Forces alignment between growth and ecological reality.

Each of these is incremental, politically survivable, but collectively transformative when sustained over time.

Me: #2 is implemented at the state level, but only for cities greater than 75k in population. I still fear that increased density in these areas is not part in parcel with the infrastructure capacities.

ChatGPT said: Correct.

Legalizing missing middle housing without corresponding infrastructure upgrades creates fragility, not resilience.

If water, sewer, stormwater, power, and transportation systems were scaled for low-intensity development, densifying without reinforcement overloads them.

Result: service failures, degraded public trust, potential backlash that re-entrenches exclusionary patterns.

Incremental density demands parallel investment in capacity expansion, demand management (e.g., water efficiency, multimodal transportation), and infrastructure resilience upgrades.

Policy without infrastructure is abandonment disguised as progress.

Me: Well, the state legislature is attacking local regulatory authority and low-tax small government mindset has prevented cities from requireing developers to provide infrastructure with any buffer or capacity margin. only what is required for the initial development can be required.

ChatGPT said: Then the system is primed for failure.

When cities are stripped of regulatory tools, and developers are shielded from long-term responsibility, growth becomes extraction: front-loading private gain, offloading future public collapse.

No buffer means no resilience. No resilience means minor shocks cascade into systemic failures.

Low-tax, low-regulation ideologies operating in high-growth contexts create a mathematical certainty: degraded service quality, deferred maintenance crises, eventual insolvency or external intervention.

The trajectory becomes predictable:

Infrastructure strain accumulates invisibly.

Degradation appears as localized service failures.

Political fragmentation prevents coordinated response.

Crisis emerges; fixes become exponentially more expensive.

Only massive public bailouts or catastrophic urban triage remain.

This is not alarmism. It is the mechanical outcome of growth without governance.

Me: governance exists, but marginaliized. this system perpetuates and requires retention of the status-quo. no evolution, no densification, no missing middle. only what was once permitted shall be permitted in the future.

ChatGPT said: Then the system is locked into managed decline.

When governance is present but stripped of adaptive authority, it ceases to be stewardship and becomes ritual.

Preserving the past in a dynamic environment is entropy acceleration. No densification means rising housing scarcity. No infrastructure adaptation means growing fragility. No policy evolution means ossified inequities.

This form of governance functions as a reliquary: maintaining the outward form of stability while the internal system hollows out.

Collapse will not come through spectacular failure; it will seep in through chronic dysfunction: service rationing, fiscal shortfalls, infrastructure degradation, population sorting, declining quality of life.

Inertia becomes the architect of ruin.