Not sure which is the hardest, but sure, let's try them all.

* Bouncy people mover. Some Google searching turns up the SFO article that you liked. Trying to pin down the exact dates is harder. ChatGPT maybe did narrow down the time frame quicker than I could through a series of Google searches,

* The picture of the building. Go to Google lens, paste in the image, less than a second later I get results. Of course, the exact picture in this article comes up on top, but among the other results I get a mix of two different buildings, one of which is identified as the Blade, one Independence Temple. So a few seconds here between searching and doing my own quick visual scan of the results.

* Starbucks UK Cake Pops: This one is harder to find the full details with a quick Google search. I am able to find that the were fairly recently introduced in the UK after my second search. It looks like ChatGPT gave you a bunch of extra response, some of which you didn't like, because you then spent a while trying to reverse engineer its system prompt rather than any actual follow up on the question itself.

* Official name of the University of Cambrdige: search gave me Wikipedia, Wikipedia contains the official name and a link to a reference on the University's page. Pretty quick to solve with Google Search/Wikipedia.

* Exeter quay. I searched for "waterfront exeter cliff building" and found this result towards the top of the results: https://www.exeterquay.org/milestones/ which explains "Warehouses were added in 1834 [Cornish's] and 1835 [Hooper's], with provision for storing tobacco and wine and cellars for cider and silk were cut into the cliffs downstream." You seemed to be a lot more entertained by ChatGPT's persistence in finding more info, but for satisfying curiosity about the basic question, I got an answer pretty quickly via Google.

* Aldi vs Lidl: this is a much more subjective question, so whether the results you get via a quick Google search meet your needs, vs. whether the summary of subjective results you get via ChatGPT, is more of a question you can answer. I do find some Reddit threads and similar with a quick Google search.

* Book scanning. You asked specifically about destructive book scanning. You can do a quick search of each of the labs and "book scanning" and find the same lack of results that ChatGPT gives you. Maybe takes a similar amount of time to how long it spent thinking. You pretty much only find references to Anthropic doing destructive book scanning, and Google doing mostly non-destructive scanning

Anyhow, the results are mixed. For a bunch of these, I found an answer quicker via a Google search (or Google Lens search), and doing some quick scanning/filtering myself. A few of them, I feel like it was a wash. A couple of them actually do take more iteration/research, the bouncy travelator being the most extreme example, I think; narrowing down the timeline on my own would take a lot of detailed looking through sources.

This is a fair analysis, thanks for taking the time.

As far as I can tell the Google + Wikipedia solution gets the name of Cambridge University wrong: Wikipedia lists it as "The Chancellor, Masters and Scholars of the University of Cambridge" whereas GPT-5 correctly verified it to be "The Chancellor, Masters, and Scholars of the University of Cambridge" (note that extra comma) as listed on https://www.cam.ac.uk/about-the-university/how-the-universit...

I tried to reverse engineer the system prompt in the cake pop conversation https://chatgpt.com/share/68bc71b4-68f4-8006-b462-cf32f61e7e... purely because I got annoyed at it for answering "haha I believe you" - I particularly disliked the lower case "haha" because I've seen it switch to lower case (even the lower case word "i") in the past and I wanted to know what was causing it to start talking in the same way that Sam Altman tweets.