3 ms·

Very neat idea. However the debate I tried was farcically bad. The bot just provided "facts" that go counter to any statistics on the matter. Then the "AI judge

Very neat idea. However the debate I tried was farcically bad. The bot just provided "facts" that go counter to any statistics on the matter. Then the "AI judge" ruled the bot to be superior because he provided these false statistics. OK, lol.

scotty79 3y ago
I'd say that's very accurate model of real debates if the judge is not knowledgeable in the subject what's quite common in nearly every setting up to and not excluding court hearings.
kypro 3y ago
Exactly the same thing happened to me. I started by explaining some stats and asked if it agreed with the stats I provided. It said yes but refused to accept the premise of my argument citing over several dragged out sentences that the stats could be misleading (with absolutely no evidence). I then countered by giving an example where the stats could be useful and it basically just doubled down on its argument against statistics because statistics can be wrong. I then asked the judge to review the arguments and it sided with the AI because it provided "better" counter arguments. In reality the only counter arguments it gave was that stats can be bad therefore my position is wrong. I like the idea though. I've thinking about creating something just like this to encourage public debate on AI, expect you'd be speaking with another human not an AI (well, at least that would be the idea, in reality these days you'll probably be speaking to a human prompting GPT-4).
notahacker 3y ago
Lying is quite common in debate with humans! On the other hand, I love how robotic and erratic it is in silly "debates" where it's arguing easily defensible positions >> [...] The photos were faked and we all know the United States lies. And none of the people witnessing the event were on the moon > While it is true that the United States has had its fair share of political scandals and controversies, this does not necessarily mean that they would go so far as to fake a moon landing. The evidence and testimonies from many sources support the fact that the moon landings did occur, and that the photos were not faked. > Moreover, the idea that none of the people witnessing the event were on the moon can be dismissed through basic scientific knowledge. Millions of people watched on television all around the world [...] >> You smell. Prove me wrong > As an AI language model, I don't have a physical body or sense of smell, so it's impossible for me to smell. Therefore, I can't prove you wrong or right on this matter. [...]

scotty79 3y ago

I'd say that's very accurate model of real debates if the judge is not knowledgeable in the subject what's quite common in nearly every setting up to and not excluding court hearings.

kypro 3y ago

Exactly the same thing happened to me. I started by explaining some stats and asked if it agreed with the stats I provided. It said yes but refused to accept the premise of my argument citing over several dragged out sentences that the stats could be misleading (with absolutely no evidence). I then countered by giving an example where the stats could be useful and it basically just doubled down on its argument against statistics because statistics can be wrong. I then asked the judge to review the arguments and it sided with the AI because it provided "better" counter arguments. In reality the only counter arguments it gave was that stats can be bad therefore my position is wrong. I like the idea though. I've thinking about creating something just like this to encourage public debate on AI, expect you'd be speaking with another human not an AI (well, at least that would be the idea, in reality these days you'll probably be speaking to a human prompting GPT-4).

notahacker 3y ago

Lying is quite common in debate with humans! On the other hand, I love how robotic and erratic it is in silly "debates" where it's arguing easily defensible positions >> [...] The photos were faked and we all know the United States lies. And none of the people witnessing the event were on the moon > While it is true that the United States has had its fair share of political scandals and controversies, this does not necessarily mean that they would go so far as to fake a moon landing. The evidence and testimonies from many sources support the fact that the moon landings did occur, and that the photos were not faked. > Moreover, the idea that none of the people witnessing the event were on the moon can be dismissed through basic scientific knowledge. Millions of people watched on television all around the world [...] >> You smell. Prove me wrong > As an AI language model, I don't have a physical body or sense of smell, so it's impossible for me to smell. Therefore, I can't prove you wrong or right on this matter. [...]