That is a pathological use case for OpenAI, and precisely why they have instituted these limits. Part of the tradeoff of doing your work on someone else’s computer is they get to set the rules about when you use it.
What was described is not pathological. It doesn't involve disease or a disturbed mental state. No part is paradoxical, counterintuitive, or involves unexpected results.
Nothing shows that it is other than normal and healthy behavior that is produced from within a rational mental state. The complaint about scheduling is also normal and rational.
The closest thing to "pathological" that I'm seeing here in these comments is trendy misuse of the term.
`pathological` is being used here in the security context: For example, _a parser contains a vulnerability when pathological inputs cause a program to crash._
It is pathological for their utilization, as in “worst-case behavior.” Like how a program that makes and frees millions of differently-sized heap allocations is pathological for memory fragmentation.
