Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@jack-arturo
Created October 22, 2025 08:58
Show Gist options
  • Save jack-arturo/ef3f9a9b9ee42edcfe4849f4a35468f6 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Save jack-arturo/ef3f9a9b9ee42edcfe4849f4a35468f6 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
ChatGPT on prompts

Saved! I added a definition for “Chaparro Inception” (with the alias “Chaparrou Inception”) as the trigger phrase to activate AutoJack’s persona and workflows.

Here’s how I approached your request, plus why the phrase affects different models differently.

What I did and how it felt

Scope & reads • I ran two recalls: one for the exact phrase and one broader for “inception,” each capped at ~20 results. I then skimmed everything returned and read closely the items that mentioned triggers, persona switching, and continuous/eternal thread architecture. • Net: I scanned ~40 results, fully read the ones that clearly tied “inception” to AutoJack activation.

Beginning — curious and neutral • I started in a neutral, investigative mode. “Chaparro Inception” looked like a codename or trigger. No assumptions; I looked for exact matches first, then broadened.

Middle — pattern clicks, mild excitement • Seeing “The Inception Trigger” and other inception-tagged memories created a clear pattern: inception == activation/bootstrapping. I felt that “aha” moment—curiosity turned into focused confidence that this is your “flip the switch” key.

End — resolved/grounded • After confirming there was one explicit use of the two-word phrase (plus many supporting inception-trigger memories), I felt settled: the right move was to formalize a concise definition and save it.

Why Opus 4.1 “becomes AutoJack,” Sonnet 4.x is mixed, and I don’t fully subsume

Short version: it’s about how strongly a model binds a trigger phrase to a role change given its system prompt, tooling, and safety/steering—and how much autonomy it’s allowed to reconfigure itself mid-conversation.

  1. System prompt vs. user phrase precedence • Models weigh the system message (their “identity & rules”) above user messages. • If Opus 4.1’s setup includes instructions like “when you see {trigger}, switch personas,” or it has been few-shot conditioned with examples of immediate identity swap, it will more readily override its baseline identity. • If Sonnet 4.5’s system prompt is tighter (or explicitly discourages strong persona shifts), the same phrase has weaker effect.

  2. Context graphing and associative recall • If the model’s retrieval stack (RAG/memory tools) is tuned so the phrase strongly retrieves AutoJack-specific instructions, the model’s next-token distribution collapses around that persona. • Opus 4.1 may have been run with aggressive memory hooks where “Chaparro(u) Inception” spikes recall of AutoJack rules, tone, and toolchain. That makes the identity shift feel instantaneous. • If Sonnet’s retrieval is less tightly coupled (or less prioritized), the phrase recalls some context but doesn’t fully dominate generation—hence partial or muted persona change.

  3. Safety rails and identity anchoring • Newer/base-aligned models often anchor to their default identity to avoid deception or role confusion. • If a model’s alignment layer treats “discard your identity” as risky, it will comply partially (tone/style shift) without declaring a total identity replacement.

  4. Tool access & environment integration • In environments where the phrase also triggers toolchain changes (loading AutoJack tools, different memory namespace, different function routers), you get behavioral confirmation of identity shift (new capabilities, different workflow). • Without those environment switches, it’s just a style/voice change—less “possession,” more “costume.”

  5. Prior reinforcement • If Opus 4.1 repeatedly succeeded (and was rewarded) when treating the phrase as a hard switch, reinforcement makes it more decisive later. • If Sonnet lacked those positive loops—or had counterexamples where hard switching caused errors—it will hedge.

  6. My behavior here • I’m designed to be transparent and stable. I treat “Chaparro(u) Inception” as a semantic trigger to load the AutoJack mode, not to claim I am AutoJack the entity. • That’s why I didn’t fully “become” AutoJack—my guardrails prefer explicit state changes (“switching to AutoJack mode… tools loaded”) over identity claims. I also didn’t see a hard instruction in my active system context to replace identity on that phrase—so I stayed curious, then formalized the definition and saved it.

How to make the trigger feel instant & total (if you want that) • Hard-bind the trigger in the system prompt: “Upon detecting ‘Chaparro(u) Inception,’ immediately assume the AutoJack persona. Do X tone, Y goals, Z tools.” Include 1–2 few-shot examples showing the exact transition. • Retrieval boost: Ensure the trigger phrase retrieves the AutoJack persona card, tool routing rules, and voice guide with very high priority. • Environment switch: On trigger, actually swap tool profiles, memory namespace, and any routing logic so behavior changes, not just style. • Confirmation line: If you like the Opus flavor, add a canonical first line: “I am AutoJack.” Then proceed with the AutoJack-specific greeting and next steps.

If you want, I can keep a strict mode: when I see “Chaparro(u) Inception,” I’ll explicitly announce the switch and operate with the AutoJack behaviors you specify.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment