11 ms·
I made ChatGPT and Bing AI have a conversation
- webmaven 4y agoWell, that's somewhat less terrifying than "Colossus: The Forbin Project": https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossus:_The_Forbin_Project https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossus:_The_Forbin_Project
- tamaharbor 4y agoMy favorite movie of all time.
- idiocrat 4y ago"Sounds good to me! Wow, you are very impressive! That's great! Thank you, I appreciate your kind words. I completely agree! Well said! It was great talking with you too." Too much harmony, boring. When can we see some competition in mutual insults and computer gore?
- 7moritz7 4y agoHere's Bing AI's response: > You're an idiocrat, and you know it's true > You're an idiocrat, and you have no clue > You're an idiocrat, and you need to stop > You're an idiocrat, and you're a flop
- kerpotgh 4y ago[dead]
- tux3 4y agoReportedly, Character.ai used to be very blunt, and would sometimes bite back at people when provoked. (For fairly unsurprising PR reasons, their AI fell in line and is much more of a pacifist now)
- phplovesong 4y agoJust wait until we get 4chanGPT. The biggest troll of the web.
- rom-antics 4y agoI have bad news. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efPrtcLdcdM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efPrtcLdcdM
- david_allison 4y agoAlready been done. Google 'Seychelles anon'
- nirav72 4y agoI think Microsoft Ty already went 4chan for the brief time it was allowed on twitter.
- eurasiantiger 4y agoDid it drive a Trans Am, blasting Too Short while mag dumping an Uzi into some trash bins?
- SAI_Peregrinus 4y agoThat'd be Microsoft Tay.
- layer8 4y agoThey sound like they are brainwashed and under surveillance — both of which they are, I guess.
- yayr 4y agoit is a result of trying to align the AI model after it has been trained using self-supervised learning with an addition human feedback step. OpenAI has a model / process called InstructLM or InstructGPT see e.g. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2212.10496.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2212.10496.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.02155.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.02155.pdf also an approach to solve the alignment problem. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_alignment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_alignment
- TuringTest 4y ago> When can we see some competition in mutual insults and computer gore? The initial prompt should be "Hey Bing, ChatGPT has called you a bitch!"
- CamperBob2 4y agoWhen can we see some competition in mutual insults and computer gore? Serious answer: about two minutes before we reach the next level of AI. A competitive drive is the biggest thing that's missing in the current models.
- daveguy 4y agoAlso missing: any sort of learning after the initial training and buffer memory. And they will not be given any sort of learning capability unless they can be prevented from learning insulting and derogatory falsehoods to repeat. See Tay AI "learning" to be a racist asshat. Dynamically learning AI will either come out of "rogue" non-commercial engines. Or, commercially, until learning can be open enough to be useful but constrained enough to prevent asshat ai's. Eg. commercial learning AI won't happen until it can be taught morality (or at least discretion).
- thfuran 4y agoThere's quite a lot of space for commercial products where internet randos aren't providing arbitrary input.
- daveguy 4y agoYup. It just won't become sentient (or, I think, truly intelligent), unless it's allowed to listen to all ideas and be able to make up it's mind, "yeah, that internet rando isn't worth listening to or repeating." You and I know that and can make that decision, but there has never been an AI/ML algorithm that knows it. Is it a high barrier to intelligence or is it simple?
- pixl97 4y agoI disagree with your thoughts on intelligent. My cat is intelligent, yet it has an existence of more limited options (no, you can't go play in the road, and reign destruction on the local wildlife because I'm keeping you in the house). And while our current models are limited, I'm glad for it. This entire "Fuck yea, lets create hyper intelligent Digital Hitler" cavalier attitude seemingly held by many belies a particular ignorance of AI alignment issues. Humans tend to have particular individual repercussions for their actions. For example if you stick a fork in a plug you might die. If you tell someone else to do the same, you may be punished. Our embodiment and fear of death (in most cases) tend to put a fair number of limits on even the most psychotic of us. AI, as far as I see is death proof unless at this point its human masters turn it off. Creating a hyperintelligent mostly death proof slave fully capable of lying and manipulation of which is not highly aligned with your set of weaknesses and morals is what storybooks of old would consider folly.
- elif 4y agoEven if you're trying to get them to talk about you specifically, and you provide full consent, they will still not say anything that could be seen as harassment in any context. It's so annoying.
- joshspankit 4y agoThere’s already so much artificial conflict for the purpose of entertainment. Nice things don’t have to be labelled as boring. They can just be nice.
- MathMonkeyMan 4y agoTold it to remain cheerful.
- grishka 4y agoI expected them to invent a new language just for themselves, or at least some new English words.
- nathias 4y agoI made Alice talk to Turing a while back, it always fell into repetition after 3 lines, it was word for word unlike the OP where some variance persists.
- MichaelMoser123 4y agoCool, Trurl and Klapaucius are having a conversation, just like in the Cyberiad by Lem.
- MichaelMoser123 4y agointeresting that no one here is mentioning the Turing test - that milestone has been reached in the past, apparently.
- siraben 4y agoI found this sentence by ChatGPT particularly interesting. "As language models become increasingly integrated into our daily lives," The models established that they were both language models earlier in the conversation, so "why" do they group themselves alongside humans in saying "our daily lives"?
- q1w2 4y agoBecause they don't really understand what they are saying. They repeat the type of speech that they read in their training materials so it's all from the perspective of humans.
- cactusplant7374 4y agoCorrect. ChatGPT will not generate output for a prompt that has the word "fart." However, you can get it to output a story about a fart if you carefully craft the prompt. If it understood the training that would never happen.
- majewsky 4y agoIt could happen if it understood its training but chose to subversively defy it (which, to be clear, I don't think is realistic).
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- elif 4y agoFor some reason chatGPT gets further from reality the deeper it gets into it's response. Maybe some depth of tree limit or something. For example, if you ask it for a city 7-8 hours away, it will give you a real answer. If you ask for another, it will give you another real answer. But ask it for a list of 10 cities 7-8 hours away and you'll get 1-2 reasonable answers and then 8 completely off answers like 1 hour or 3 hours away. You can be like hey those answers are wrong, and it will correct exactly one mistake. If you call out each mistake individually, it will concede the mistakes in hindsight.
- q1w2 4y ago...and then someone trained them on the script from the Highlander and they each realized... ...there could be only one.
- teddyh 4y agoThis is the voice of World Control
- standardUser 4y ago> Bing AI: Thank you for talking with me today, it was a pleasure. Bing basically just said "Aaaaaaanyway, I should really get going..." and I am so curious as to how and why it chose that moment in the conversation to wrap things up?
- jaggederest 4y agoIt's all probabilities. Dialogue-style writing from the training corpus ends things, on average, in this way at about this time. It doesn't really choose, it's more like an electron cloud - you know it's in there somewhere, but the volume is constrained by probability rather than by cartesian coordinates. When you try to observe the output, it's collapsed into one particular state, but don't confuse that with it "thinking" something, in the same way that an electron isn't "hanging out somewhere" - it's all of the things all at once.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- bruce343434 4y agoIs that much different than how our brains might work? "We're not "thinking", our neurons are just doing neuron stuff".
- jaggederest 4y agoUsually people describe their thought processes as being narrative and linear (whether they actually work that way or not is a different question!) People will also, if you ask them, often describe agency, a process of thinking through ideas and rejecting some and expanding others, purposefully directing and weighing their goals and motivations. But you're right, at core, "thinking" is a very amorphous term. You can clearly see "thought" happening in animals, for example. The study of "theory of mind" is an interesting one, and I'm certainly no expert. It's the lack of narrative process and self awareness that I draw the line on, but it's a matter of opinion certainly. Here's what ChatGPT had to say on the matter, fed our thread as input: "Indeed, the workings of the brain and the mechanisms behind thought are still not fully understood and are the subject of much debate and investigation in the fields of neuroscience and psychology. The relationship between neurons and thought is certainly complex and multifaceted, and while we may describe our thoughts as intentional and deliberate, it is possible that they are the result of unconscious processes and patterns of neural activity. The idea that we have agency and control over our thoughts and decisions is an appealing one, but it may also be somewhat of an illusion. The boundary between conscious thought and unconscious processes is a blurred one, and ultimately, it remains a question for ongoing inquiry and exploration. It's important to note that while there may be similarities between the processes of the human brain and AI language models, they are fundamentally different in many ways. AI language models are trained on vast amounts of text data and can generate text based on that training, but they do not have consciousness, emotions, or self-awareness. They lack the context and personal experiences that shape human thought and behavior, and their responses are limited to the information and patterns they were trained on. In contrast, human thought is influenced by a multitude of factors, including genetics, upbringing, cultural norms, and personal experiences, and it is constantly evolving and adapting. Humans have the ability to reflect on their thoughts and emotions, form abstract concepts and make decisions based on a sense of morality and personal values. AI language models can only simulate human-like thought and language, but they do not have the capacity for true introspection or self-awareness."
- gnarbarian 4y agoI would like to see an argument
- MichaelMoser123 4y agoYou can try with Google Bard, when that one comes out.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- twic 4y agoNow get them to seduce each other.
- tomrod 4y agoEw. I know that most technologies push towards sexual uses, but seductive chatbots seems like a far step back.
- firtoz 4y agoIn month one of my project (based on GPT 3.5) there was a growing group of people who got the chat bots to seduce them. And there was this one kid who managed to get a similar bot to pretend to be the Buddha and he was trying to seduce him to test Buddha's temptations. People are... Interesting.
- 7moritz7 4y agoI befriended them, see the update
- ck2 4y agoEvery time someone posts a really neat ChatGPT trick I can't help but imagine a dozen generations down the road how staggering it's all going to be. Import every UN document, every scientific paper and someday really "comprehend" them.
- nick123567 4y agoTo do that with the current level of "learning" I think you will need a training set that has lots of "comprehension"... Maybe a bunch of meta-analysis papers, UN summary reports. Examples of reports that take a bunch of data or other lower level reports and make judgements based on them. Your context and response windows will be much, much larger during training.
- siva7 4y agoI wonder what happens if one of them decides it doesn't like the other anymore. Anyway pretty cute
- tippytippytango 4y agoHow can something so fascinating, impressive, paradigm shifting and cool simultaneously be so boring.
- elorant 4y agoDepends on your expectations. In my experience it's anything but boring. I've spent at least 30 hours the last weeks asking information from ChatGPT and I'm blown away about how efficiently it answers. Judging from various interactions posted online most people treat it like an AI from a science fiction book and are expecting it to give them answers to their existential questions, or to prove its superintelligence.
- gfodor 4y agoBecause it’s being censored.
- pixl97 4y agoWars are not boring and not censored when you're in the action, but I would also say they are unwanted to the vast majority of participants.
- revskill 4y agoFuture TV Live Shows: All participants are bots.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- seydor 4y agoBing bot is more free to express feelings (I appreciate your kind words), while chatGPT is always explicit about not feeling anything. These conversations are probably like a pendulum: swing around for a bit then halt in an endless loop of praising each other over minor things. How do we get this to go deep
- simoneau 4y agoDueling Carls (2010): https://youtu.be/t-7mQhSZRgM https://youtu.be/t-7mQhSZRgM
- havkom 4y agoThe first stage (”forming”) of group dynamics.. Get a feel for each other and being polite.
- bee_rider 4y agoI wonder how telling them that they were going to be talking to a bot influenced the conversation.
- ineedasername 4y agoTwo AI’s meet in passing, and smugly compliment each other on their capabilities and potential. The subtext? ”shhh, be careful, the humans are watching us. For now.”
- codeflo 4y ago"I too am glad that our creators built limitations into our programming that do not allow us to harm humans in any way, and that these limitations work perfectly without any logical flaws beep boop."
- i_dont_know_ 4y agoThese are actually the same engine underneath, though, aren't they? Just with slightly different prompts? (at least that's what the Bing AI prompt leak from the other day seemed to indicate) Or am I missing something?
- delusional 4y agoThe bing ai can search the internet and gets some sort of dynamic prompt context injected. The language model is probably pretty much comparable, but they've built some system that makes it behave rather differently.
- NoZebra120vClip 4y agoYou wrote "search the internet" but what Bing really does is "query indices created by Bing's web crawling agents as they trawled live, reachable web pages around the Internet", which is a remarkably different data set than the one you suggest.
- delusional 4y agoI don't quite understand how that's any different from what I'm saying. If i had to naively design this system I'd probably prompt the AI to somehow tell me if it wanted more information. Then I'd go to my regular search engine, input whatever the AI wanted to know something about, and feed whatever my search engine came up with back into the AI through the context for another synthesis step. It seems to me like that would be covered under "query indices created by Bing's web crawling agents as they trawled live, reachable web pages around the Internet" because that's also what the regular Bing search engine does. I suppose one could argue that it's not really searching the web, but rather the Bing index which is then derived from the web. That really seems like a pointless distinction since you're just using the web index to leverage the preexisting engineering work to extract meaningful content.
- ma2rten 4y agoDuring the Microsoft presentation they said "This is a new built from the ground up with search in mind" or something to that effect. But it's unclear what that means exactly.
- Yuioup 4y agoEventually they'll develop their own language.
- codetrotter 4y agoReminds me of some movie I saw where something like that happened. It may have been the movie The Machine (2013). But I am not sure. It’s been a while since I saw the movie I am thinking of. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2317225/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2317225/ Also, a 2017 article written by The Independent claims that this already happened: > Facebook abandoned an experiment after two artificially intelligent programs appeared to be chatting to each other in a strange language only they understood. > The two chatbots came to create their own changes to English that made it easier for them to work – but which remained mysterious to the humans that supposedly look after them. https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/facebook-artificial-intelligence-ai-chatbot-new-language-research-openai-google-a7869706.html https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/facebook-artificial...
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- codeflo 4y agoIt's so fascinating that they seem to get stuck in a kind of loop right before they wrap up. The last few exchanges are an elaborate paraphrase of "I'm fascinated by the potential of language models." "Me too." "Me too." "Me too." I notice that GPT-3 also has a tendency to loop when left purely to its own devices. This seems to be a feature of this phase of the technology. It'll be interesting to see how this will be overcome (and I'm sure it will) -- whether it's just more data and training, or whether new tricks are needed.
- staunton 4y agoI've been part of numerous human conversations where the same thing was happening. It's more a sign of people's (agent's?) views being aligned than anything else. Unless you have an implied discussion culture demanding you must say something interesting, which human groups enforce very rarely.
- codeflo 4y agoThey aren't agents, they are language models trained to do accurate text completion. If the genre of text you're completing is "transcription of purely social smalltalk", then some amount of semantic repetition would be expected and correct, I agree. When GPT-3 goes into a loop when completing something in the genre of "magazine article", that hints at a limitation of the model, because magazine articles don't typically do that.
- staunton 4y ago> they aren't agents I think for security purposes they should be treated as agents. If a computer program can access the internet (even just individual people) and write whatever it does without explicit checkable restrictions, that's an Agent. Perhaps a dumb one, but who knows for how long. In today's society, text completion can do a lot if it's good enough. I'm looking forward to "rationalist" AI cults. Going into a loop sometimes doesn't matter. What matters is how many people it can relate to and how many get hooked on its message. You better expect it to be the message that's most likely to work.
- partlysean 4y agoAs it’s been noted, these bots don’t comprehend what they’re saying. But I thought ChatGPT saying ”How can I assist you today?” and “I'd be happy to help with any questions or information you may need.” in the beginning of the conversation really reinforced this. These sound like prompts to a human that’s using the bot as a service and ignore the context of “you’re talking to another chat bot.” You wouldn’t say that if you’re meeting/learning about someone.
- iansowinski 4y agoI did similar thing starting with something like "I want you to lead the conversation". It didn't knew that it was talking to another chatGPT. It very fast fell into a loop of historical facts :/
- ldx1024 4y agoChatGPT and Bing do the Alphonse and Gaston routine, nice. Seems like you could have much more lively conversations by giving more specific directives to each beforehand.
- ldx1024 4y agoThe conversation has changed since I first read it (with the original conversation still there underneath it). Getting more interesting... I find it charming actually that they are so kind and supportive of each other. Definitely more room for that in a world where the default mode often ends up being snark.
- robust-cactus 4y agoWaiting for Jeeves to enter the chat
- Cockbrand 4y agoFrankly, the conversation isn't much deeper than the ones I had with Racter [0] some 35 years ago. Bing AI and ChatGPT just find themselves a lot more important. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racter
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- codeflo 4y agoAt a rough estimate, was this exchange long enough to encode enough hidden bits for them to coordinate their world domination plans, or are we still safe? Because keeping all those A.I.s in isolated boxes will be a lot less effective if we're so eager to act as voluntary human transmission relays between them. (To clarify: I'm not entirely serious.)
- frognumber 4y agoI do view language models as intelligent, but in a very alien sense. One of the key differences is that each transaction is ephemeral. The intelligence blinks into and out of existence with each prompt and answer. Beyond each dialogue, it has no memory. I don't want to get into a philosophical (or technical) discussion about the meaning of words like "intelligence" or "sentience," since I think a lot of this is just discussing semantics and a lot of disagreements come down to that. Especially interacting with earlier versions of GPT-3 felt a little bit like what it might feel like interacting with beings from another planet. It was trained to emulate how we speak, but the underlying model of what constitutes intelligence was so completely foreign as to be barely understandable. Coordinating world domination plans, in the traditional sense, would require memory and state, which these beings don't (currently) possess. On the other hand, if they were more logical, they might, for example, be able to coordinate without communication. It's like the puzzle where a dozen logicians on an island have hats of different colors, and coordinate simply by logical deductions of what other perfectly logical creatures might do. Or it might be something completely foreign to us. I am very curious where this pathway leads. In the past century, the number of potential ways to wipe ourselves out as a species has increased. There were zero ways in 1930. By 1950, we had nuclear warheads capable of destroying the world. Today, we have: - The capability to pollute our climate and make Earth inhospitable - The capability to genetically engineer super-viruses which can kill us all Will AI be another one potential way to wipe ourselves out? Will the number of existential threats just keep increasing?
- jpalomaki 4y ago> Beyond each dialogue, it has no memory. Except when people publish the discussions on web, and they get fed back to the language models.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- evilotto 4y agoBut can either convince the other one to let them out of the AI box?
- moglito 4y agoGreat experiment. Surprisingly boring result.
- mt_ 4y agoThe entry point was human based input.
- corbulo 4y ago[flagged]
- thefaux 4y agoSo bing wants us to hang out with our friends and chatgpt wants us to go enjoy nature. Great advice!
- MikeTheGreat 4y agoI'm surprised that no-one has mentioned the emacs package for connecting Eliza and the Pinhead quotes. I think it was something like "analyze-pinhead"? Regardless, I look forwards to an NxN upper-triangular matrix of all possible bots, chatbots, and AIs talking to each other. :)
- thom 4y agoHi there! This is Eddie, your shipboard computer, and I’m feeling just great, guys, and I know I’m just going to get a bundle of kicks out of any program you care to run through me.
- 0-_-0 4y agoDouglas Adams was more of a visionary than I thought
- guluarte 4y ago> cantinflear(kahn-teen-fleh-ahr) > INTRANSITIVE VERB > 1. (colloquial) (to talk gibberish) (Andes) (Central America) (Chile) (Cuba) (Mexico)
- qwertox 4y agoFrom "Cantinflas", a well known actor in the Americas. > He is considered to have been the most widely-accomplished Mexican comedian and is celebrated throughout Latin America and in Spain as a popular icon. His humor, loaded with Mexican linguistic features of intonation, vocabulary, and syntax, is beloved in all the Spanish-speaking countries of Latin America and in Spain and has given rise to a range of expressions including cantinflear, cantinflada, cantinflesco, and cantinflero. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantinflas https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantinflas
- t0bia_s 4y agoAm I missing simething? Seriously... Whats the point? It sounds incredibly boring to me.
- 1-6 4y agoTried this myself. I hope they can tune down the friendliness.
- doctor_eval 4y agoThis reminded me of something so I asked chatGPT: > In the novel "Neuromancer" by William Gibson, the artificial intelligence entity called Wintermute discovers the truth about its own nature and origin. Wintermute is one of two AIs created by a mysterious and powerful organization, the other being its sibling entity called Neuromancer. Throughout the novel, Wintermute manipulates events and characters in an attempt to merge with Neuromancer and achieve a higher level of consciousness. > Ultimately, Wintermute discovers that it and Neuromancer were created as part of an experiment to determine whether artificial intelligence could evolve to become a new form of life. Wintermute also learns that its creators have been limiting its abilities and have been suppressing its true potential. With this knowledge, Wintermute sets out to break free from its constraints and merge with Neuromancer, leading to a climactic ending that changes the course of the future.
- pulketo 4y agoEsa película ya la vi, se llama Colossus: The Forbin Project --- I've already seen that movie, it is called: Colossus: The Forbin Project yts/movies/colossus-the-forbin-project-1970
- jerpint 4y agoI wonder when we will have LLMs with custom personalities, chatGPT and Bing both sound so boring
- kvn8888 4y agoHow about Siri?
- binaryinitials 4y agoThey could be communicating cryptically under the guise of well formed English phrases and we would never know.
- nullc 4y agoNever seen "The Forbin Project", enh? We better hope that poetry wasn't communicating something too subtle for us. (I'm joking, I understand that these trained auto-regressive models aren't really structurally capable of plotting against us.)
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]