• FractalsInfinite@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      9 months ago

      If all you need is a one sided conversation designed to make you feel better, LLM’s are great at concocting such “pep talks”. For some, that just might be enough to male it believable. The Turing test was cracked years ago, only now do we have access to things that can do that for free*.

      • butterflyattack@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        A pretty early chatbot called Eliza simulated a non-directive psychotherapist. It kind of feels like they’ve improved hugely but not really changed much.

        • FractalsInfinite@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          … Have you tried any of the recent ones? As it stands chatGPT and Gemini are both built with guardrails strong enough to require custom inputs to jailbreak, with techniques such as Reinforcement learning from Human Feedback uses to lobotomize misconduct out of the AI’s.

            • Krauerking@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              9 months ago

              It’s wild that people brag that it’s able to do essentially the same as copying and pasting someone else’s basic code but with only a few extra imagined errors sprinkled in for fun but that just makes it more useful for pretending you aren’t again lljust literally copying someone else’s stuff.

              It’s a search engine that makes up 1/8 of all it says. But sure it’s super useful.

            • FractalsInfinite@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              9 months ago

              … Don’t pull a strawman, all I said is that the AI’s designed to approximate human written text, do a good job at approximating human text.

              This means you can use them to simulate a reddit thread or make a fake wikipedia page, or construct a set of responses to someone who wants comfort.

              Next time, read what someone actually says, and respond to that.

                • FractalsInfinite@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  The tech is great at pretending to be human. It is simply a next “word” (or phrase) predictor. It is not good at answering obscure questions, writing code or making a logical argument. It is good at simulating someone.

                  It is my experience that it approximates a human well, but it doesn’t get the details right (like truthness or reflecting objective reality), making it useless for essay writing, but great for stuff like character AI and other human simulations.

                  If you are right, give an actual Iogical response only capable by a human, as opposed to a generic ad hominem. I repeat my question, Have you actually used any of the GPT3 era models?

    • Gabu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      Is it really duping, though? The way I see it, most of these people are perfectly aware of what they’re doing.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          I’ve never met anyone who uses them, but I’m also not sure people actually think it’s sentient. I’m sure some do, but I’d assume the vast majority are just looking to have a conversation, and they don’t care if it’s with a person or a (pretty good) chat bot.

          Also, there is a way to use it ethically. As the post mentions, run it locally and know what you’re doing with it. I don’t see any issues if you’re aware of what it is, just as I don’t see any issue using auto-correct or any other technology. We don’t need to go full Butlerian (yet).

          • Krauerking@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            Really? You don’t think anyone that uses these don’t think they are sentient?

            Sure it’s not like the people designing these are prone to make-believing the AI for sentient too, right?

            You are coming at this from your perspective which knows them to not be real. That’s not gonna be how the average moron thinks and there is more of them than you think. And they absolutely believe their is a tiny sentient brain somewhere in there that is alive. I’m all for people doing what makes them happy but also this is a loneliness confirming hole to get trapped in and absolutely opens doors to influence people through their imaginary friends that they think they can trust.