3 ms·

> lie A lie is a deliberate intent to deceive someone who is entitled to the truth. If I may coin a phrase, LLMs don't "lie", they "Johnson". Picking their w

> lie A lie is a deliberate intent to deceive someone who is entitled to the truth. If I may coin a phrase, LLMs don't "lie", they "Johnson". Picking their words to sound erudite, but with absolutely no regard for truth or the lack thereof. There is no lie, because (unlike with the former PM of the UK) there is no intent to deceive.

inbfour 3y ago
In this example I do think it is a lie, and one that fits your definition. Think back to when these models were first released, or even back to v2 and v3. The models would have just “tried” to answer and it would have likely been a mangled mess. But this version gave an erudite answer to an unasked question. If the original prompt was “Can one write a password generator in INTERCAL?” I might agree with your claim of “johnsoning”, but it instead just said “Please write…”. I think this points to the fact that the model is filtering its own answers, similar to if you ask it be offensive, or do your homework, or quote psychadaelic scifi. This was what I wanted to highlight. That the model has been specifically and intentionally productized to lie to save the parent company’s coffers. Responding with ~“I would but it’s just too complex” would satisfy most without the accompanying article, but the author is well trained and so provides a solution that would even fit within the model’s current meager token limits.
- andrewaylett 3y ago
  In the context of the Internet, I suspect there are more people who have claimed that solving any given problem in INTERCAL is impossible than there are people who have provided a solution. While less esoteric languages probably have more solutions provided? Also, though, I'd question whether the LLM has any intent. In your explanation, it's OpenAI who have the intent to deceive, not the LLM.
  - inbfour 3y ago
    > In your explanation, it's OpenAI who have the intent to deceive, not the LLM. Correct, but this feels tautological, or semantic. In a closed environment the black box is the model, whether that be a single instance, or a mixture of 8 experts.

inbfour 3y ago

In this example I do think it is a lie, and one that fits your definition. Think back to when these models were first released, or even back to v2 and v3. The models would have just “tried” to answer and it would have likely been a mangled mess. But this version gave an erudite answer to an unasked question. If the original prompt was “Can one write a password generator in INTERCAL?” I might agree with your claim of “johnsoning”, but it instead just said “Please write…”. I think this points to the fact that the model is filtering its own answers, similar to if you ask it be offensive, or do your homework, or quote psychadaelic scifi. This was what I wanted to highlight. That the model has been specifically and intentionally productized to lie to save the parent company’s coffers. Responding with ~“I would but it’s just too complex” would satisfy most without the accompanying article, but the author is well trained and so provides a solution that would even fit within the model’s current meager token limits.

andrewaylett 3y ago
In the context of the Internet, I suspect there are more people who have claimed that solving any given problem in INTERCAL is impossible than there are people who have provided a solution. While less esoteric languages probably have more solutions provided? Also, though, I'd question whether the LLM has any intent. In your explanation, it's OpenAI who have the intent to deceive, not the LLM.
- inbfour 3y ago
  > In your explanation, it's OpenAI who have the intent to deceive, not the LLM. Correct, but this feels tautological, or semantic. In a closed environment the black box is the model, whether that be a single instance, or a mixture of 8 experts.