ChatGPT's Answer to "Why does bullet jump affect precision?"

[222Jim]

I've recently started exploring AI (Artificial Intelligence) models to see what all the fuss is about in the press.

This morning, I asked ChatGPT (https://chatgpt.com) "Why does bullet jump affect precision?" Why that question? It's a topic that almost everyone has an opinion on (including me), be it an informed opinion, speculation, or simply something that sounded good when they read it in a blog or forum.

I was somewhat impressed by the answer I got from ChatGPT, so I've attached it to this Post.

ChatGPT's answer is simple, concise, and hits on most of the major reasons I've come to understand about why jump matters. It's also missing a few (likely secondary or tertiary issues) reasons I've read about, i.e. bullet base deformation, described by Harold Vaughn in Rifle Accuracy Facts, and other reasons covered by the likes of Jeff Stewert in his numerous writings (many listed in his Bulletology https://bulletology.com website and/or his book Ammunition, Demystified).

Thoughts or feedback?

 

[Tommie]

Two things I’ll never play with:
A.I. and ouija boards.

 

[Webster]

I've recently started exploring AI (Artificial Intelligence) models to see what all the fuss is about in the press.

This morning, I asked ChatGPT (https://chatgpt.com) "Why does bullet jump affect precision?" Why that question? It's a topic that almost everyone has an opinion on (including me), be it an informed opinion, speculation, or simply something that sounded good when they read it in a blog or forum.

I was somewhat impressed by the answer I got from ChatGPT, so I've attached it to this Post.

ChatGPT's answer is simply, concise, and hits on most of the major reasons I've come to understand about why jump matters. It's also missing a few (likely secondary or tertiary issues) reasons I've read about, i.e. bullet base deformation, described by Harold Vaughn in Rifle Accuracy Facts, and other reasons covered by the likes of Jeff Stewert in his numerous writings (many listed in his Bulletology https://bulletology.com website and/or his book Ammunition, Demystified).

Thoughts or feedback?

FYI, I also asked DeepSeek the same question and got an utterly rubbish answer referring to a computer game.

I don't trust any computer program. You have to shoot the rifle to see what works. The Forum manager banned all AI data from this website.

 

[222Jim]

I don't trust any computer program. You have to shoot the rifle to see what works. The Forum manager banned all AI data from this website.

I agree re posting AI data, and I didn't post any data. Hell, I even avoid sharing my own load data in case a typo turns a great load into a dangerous one. Thus, my post was purely text; a brief description of why jump affects precision according to AI.

 

[Kevin1990]

I like using chat and grok for certain things in the realm of firearms, because it can give a vast general consensus of certain questions. I like comparing cartridges with it. Basically use it as my first layer of research before I start asking questions and digging deeper, to not only save myself time, but learn about the said cartridge.

For instance, I learned about the difference in 6br variants, bra, brx, brdx, dasher, etc. Once I end up picking one of those cartridges, I'll come on here and start asking questions about it, or better yet look through old threads and continue my journey of learning.


I use chat and grok daily, especially when writing papers for college or sending emails. I'll say "spell and grammar check this, but do not change any wording." I'll usually ask how many spelling and grammar errors it found and to bolden them. It's helped me become a better writer, and critical thinker, because I can bounce ideas off of it and challenge it. Unfortunately, a lot of people in my realm of college rely solely on it to do everything and I think to some extent it's dumbing down society's younger generations.


I'm finishing up my bachelor's before going for my master's in psychology, and I can tell you with certainty based on the research I've done that it's in its infancy and newer models will be able to think and formulate explanations independently on their own. No technology is inherently bad, it's just that some people are.


I mean people say they'll never use it, and compare it to dark magic lol, ask it anything and then ask it where it got the information from and it will cite it for you, this is where that critical thinking comes into play.


I used chat to proof this very message.

 

[K22]

You don't need any "stinkin" AI to explain what shooters have known ever since they began reloading for precision shooting purposes.

The reason "why" in my opinion doesn't amount to a "hill of beans" unless you are into theoretical discussions. Most bullet will behave differently and the only way to know is to test them. In addition, the Remington 700's (at least the vintage ones) had a lot of free bore which necessitated a long jump. Yet, most of them shot extremely well.

Several years ago, Sierra published an article on this issue. The bottom line was that some bullet in some rifles prefer a longer jump for optimum accuracy whereas other do not.

So how does one deal with this? Unless you like load development testing at the bench with the associated cost / consumption of components, here's how I deal with it.

I establish for my purposes a precision standard. Once I find a load that will meets that standard and will fit the magazine, I suspend further testing. Obviously, this will not be suitable for some shooting disciplines where .1's matter but for me, given all the variable of wind, mirage, temperature, terrain, and inherent shooter variation, a few .1's here or there has no practical effect for me.

 

[Fast14riot]

I think using LLM computing in this manner can help people get a better understandings of topics. You can also upload a link or file and ask it to summarize or explain in lay terms for you.

Regarding citations provided by AI, always be sure to check the citations. AI has made up citations to provide information biased to the prompts, too.

 

[CharlieNC]

AI simply echoed various "opinions" which have been reported, it did not offer a definitive answer which is still lacking.

 

[dryhumor]

AI = Almost Intelligent

But not quite… It’s getting harder to avoid it on the web. It’s becoming more prevalent, and overall, I’m reminded of the old programming axiom. Garbage in garbage out. You can spot the effect of a bad line of code, AI is not as easy.

 

[D-4297]

AI creates their "DATA" from information and "OPINIONS" supplied . So in reality ; you are only getting more Opinions in a different form . You can get the same thing here , based on "experience" of actual shooters , and not theories .

 

[SSL]

I've recently started exploring AI (Artificial Intelligence) models to see what all the fuss is about in the press.

This morning, I asked ChatGPT (https://chatgpt.com) "Why does bullet jump affect precision?" Why that question? It's a topic that almost everyone has an opinion on (including me), be it an informed opinion, speculation, or simply something that sounded good when they read it in a blog or forum.

I was somewhat impressed by the answer I got from ChatGPT, so I've attached it to this Post.

ChatGPT's answer is simply, concise, and hits on most of the major reasons I've come to understand about why jump matters. It's also missing a few (likely secondary or tertiary issues) reasons I've read about, i.e. bullet base deformation, described by Harold Vaughn in Rifle Accuracy Facts, and other reasons covered by the likes of Jeff Stewert in his numerous writings (many listed in his Bulletology https://bulletology.com website and/or his book Ammunition, Demystified).

Thoughts or feedback?

FYI, I also asked DeepSeek the same question and got an utterly rubbish answer referring to a computer game.

Regardless of many of the opinions...it's still a fun exercise and totally harmless as long as one doesn't take the answer as pure gospel...much like some of the postings on sites such as this!

 

[SD guy]

Take sources with a grain of salt & compare notes with as many sources as possible. Some sources are more trustworthy than others. Then if we do not challenge the source & verify a source, this may be more likely to yeild poor outcomes.

 

[222Jim]

Take sources with a grain of salt & compare notes with as many sources as possible. Some sources are more trustworthy than others. Then if we do not challenge the source & verify a source, this may be more likely to yeild poor outcomes.

Agreed, and hence my reference to others, noting Jeff Stewert's work as well as Harold Vaughn's.

 

[jds holler]

If you think that information received from AI is any more - or less reliable than the "wisdom" you receive on this forum, or down at the gun store, you're suffering from NI. (naive intelligence)
jd

 

[jelenko]

It's important to understand that AI doesn't make it's own stuff up. It's simply reporting what it's learned and/or found on the internet.

ETA. It responds in a way that makes it seem it's intelligent - i.e., it assembles words in a way that we can understand and sound like a person speaking.

 

[Webster]

I've recently started exploring AI (Artificial Intelligence) models to see what all the fuss is about in the press.

This morning, I asked ChatGPT (https://chatgpt.com) "Why does bullet jump affect precision?" Why that question? It's a topic that almost everyone has an opinion on (including me), be it an informed opinion, speculation, or simply something that sounded good when they read it in a blog or forum.

I was somewhat impressed by the answer I got from ChatGPT, so I've attached it to this Post.

ChatGPT's answer is simple, concise, and hits on most of the major reasons I've come to understand about why jump matters. It's also missing a few (likely secondary or tertiary issues) reasons I've read about, i.e. bullet base deformation, described by Harold Vaughn in Rifle Accuracy Facts, and other reasons covered by the likes of Jeff Stewert in his numerous writings (many listed in his Bulletology https://bulletology.com website and/or his book Ammunition, Demystified).

Thoughts or feedback?

Real simple. No computer stuff. Just shoot several jump distances and see what works best. You don't need to know why or how t works.

 

[Coyotefurharvester]

And the increasing use of AI will geometrically overload our power grids.

 

[Keith Glasscock]

My understanding of AI is that it is a web-crawling parrot. If it is simply spitting out the most common opinion, it also can spit out collective delusions.

I think it best to design appropriate experiments and conduct them oneself. The truth could be far different from what one reads in the internet echo chambers.

 

[Jonnyofalltrades]

Some of what AI spits out is absolutely ludicrous.
It seems to misunderstand my questions more often than not.

I ask odd questions, perhaps?

 

[Kevin1990]

Some of what AI spits out is absolutely ludicrous.
It seems to misunderstand my questions more often than not.

I ask odd questions, perhaps?

I asked it if 100 men could take on one gorilla, and ended up having a 10 minute conversation with multiple scenarios. Just in case you were curious, 100 well trained mixed martial artists, coming at it from all angles grabbing it by the limbs and dog piling it could take on a silver back, but it would inflict many casualties, haha.