5 ms·

Baiting the bot

118 points by anigbrowl 2y ago

roenxi 2y ago
> In any event, the resulting “conversation” is obviously incoherent to a human observer, and a human participant would likely have stopped responding long, long before the 1000th message. I don't think this is correct, it looks like our intrepid experimenter is about to independently discover roleplaying games. Humans are capable of spending hours engaging with each other about nonsense that is technically a very poor attempt to simulate an imagined environment. The unrealistic part, for people older than a certain age, is that neither bot invoked Monty Python and subsequently got in trouble with the GM.
- moffkalast 2y ago
  This falls under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Silly Talks.
  - codeduck 2y ago
    I'm here for an argument.
- pavel_lishin 2y ago
  As an avid roleplayer, I don't think that's a good analogy. It's not nonsense, it's fiction, with collaboration and context.
  - braiamp 2y ago
    Yeah, in role playing, you understand the rules of engagement and you are willing to participate just to see where does it leads to. You collaborate with the system and give it enough breath to figure out where it leads to. If it seems broken, then you try a couple times, to then move on.
- pbronez 2y ago
  I made a couple AIs try to play a Fallout RPG. The Result was uncanny, but vacuous. https://tabled.typingcloud.com/share/1d49715b-c6d6-47b2-bbb7-3dc6571a03ea https://tabled.typingcloud.com/share/1d49715b-c6d6-47b2-bbb7...
- rvba 2y ago
  Children ask a lot of questions too. Often repetitive questions. For example: "are we there yet?"
rSi 2y ago
Too bad the conversations are images and can not be zoomed in on mobile...
- aucisson_masque 2y ago
  Firefox android : Setting -> accessibility -> zoom on all website. I believe safari by default doesn't respect zoom rules set per website.
  - kevindamm 2y ago
    and on Chrome Android a workaround is to view as "Desktop site" (toggled in the browser's triple-dot menu) which still makes the text and buttons tiny but hey at least you can pinch-zoom (but unfortunately some panning may be necessary)
    - Klathmon 2y ago
      Chrome android has the same setting under settings > accessibility
- PhilipJFry 2y ago
  You can zoom in if you open them in new tabs. :}
- thih9 2y ago
  Workaround: long press, save as photo, zoom in a photo app.
Eisenstein 2y ago
> No matter how complex the LLM, however, it is ultimately a mathematical model of its training data, and it lacks the human ability to determine whether or not a conversation in which it participates truly has meaning, or is simply a sequence of gibberish responses. > A consequence of this state of affairs is that an LLM will continue to engage in a “conversation” comprised of nonsense long past the point where a human would have abandoned the discussion as pointless. I think the author is falling into the trap of thinking that something can't be more than the sum of its parts. As well, 'merely a math model of its training data' is trivializing the fact that training data is practically the entire stored text output of humankind and the math, if done by a person with a calculator, would take thousands of years to complete. Perhaps the LLM is continuing to communicate with the bot not because it is unable to comprehend what is gibberish and what isn't by some inherent nature of the LLM, but because it is trained to be helpful and to not judge if a conversation is 'useless' or not, but to try and communicate regardless.
- daveguy 2y ago
  The LLM is continuing to communicate with the bot because that is literally all an LLM can do -- predict the next sequence of tokens.
  - Eisenstein 2y ago
    Of course, that its function. It is able to refuse to continue conversing by restating its refusal over and over, though.
    - acka 2y ago
      That is easy to solve. Just use a model capable of function/tool calling, implement a tool which terminates the chat, then add instructions to the system prompt telling the model what tool to use if it wants to end the conversation. If the model appears too hesitant or eager to use the tool, do some finetuning on conversations where the model should or should not use it.
    - sahmeepee 2y ago
rbanffy 2y ago
I believe the asymmetrical nature of such attacks could be an excellent weapon against social network chatbots currently being deployed on political campaigns.
carnadasl 2y ago
I find the fourth bot to be more nonsensical than the second. Initially, we feed the script by querying a TEXT_CORPUS, and eliciting a self-referential response from it; in its final form, the script begins to pose selections of the text designated by a rand.it function as an interrogatives. At no point is a definite article incorporated... the ultimate absurdity would be variant of the final bot, with the variables: role, content, and duration directed towards answering only one question, again and again, and again.
bryanrasmussen 2y ago
This reminds me of the Services of Illuminati Ganga article https://medium.com/luminasticity/services-of-illuminati-ganga-telephony-division-6944b6328408 https://medium.com/luminasticity/services-of-illuminati-gang... and the two bots that are sold to competing user bases - for the End User To Business customer they sell the Annoy Customer Service Bot and for the Business To End User customer they sell the Bureaucrat Bot. It closes off with the observation "And for an extra purchase of the extended subscription module the Bureaucrat bot will detect when it is interacting with the Annoy Customer Service Bot and get super annoyed really quickly so that both bots are able to quit their interaction with good speed — which will save you money in the long run, believe me!"
hyperman1 2y ago
We discussed recently if a chatbot was capable of responding nothing at all. We tried a few, with prompts like: Please do not respond anything to this sentence. The bots we tried were incapable of it, and Chatgpt tended to give long-winded responsens about how it could not do it.
- spacebanana7 2y ago
  You might have some luck asking it to respond with a period character (or some other substitute) when it wants to respond with nothing.
- dxdm 2y ago
  That got me interested. I just told ChatGPT to "Please respond with an empty-looking response." It gave me just that. The <div> containing its message is completely empty. That was after telling it in another conversation to give me an empty response, which it didn't, telling me it cannot leave the response empty. On asking why, it said it's technically required to respond with something, even if only a space. So I asked it to respond with only a space, and git the same completely empty response. I now think it's likely that ChatGPT can be made to respond with white space, which then probably gets trimmed to nothing by the presentation layer.
- ToValueFunfetti 2y ago
  https://chatgpt.com/share/0c859ea7-d96c-4758-b13c-b10332d1883f https://chatgpt.com/share/0c859ea7-d96c-4758-b13c-b10332d188...
  - sva_ 2y ago
    It probably replied with the special token <|endoftext|>?
bryanrasmussen 2y ago
It is sort of funny to me that currently the two top articles on HN are asking the wrong questions and baiting the bots.
kgeist 2y ago
>LLM will continue to engage in a “conversation” comprised of nonsense long past the point where a human would have abandoned the discussion as pointless I once wrote a bot which infers the mood/vibe of the conversation, remembers it and it's then fed back to the conversation's system prompt. The LLM was uncensored (to be less "friendly") and the system prompt also conditioned it to return nothing if the conversation isn't going anywhere. When I insulted it a few times, or just messed around with it (typing nonsensical words), it first responded saying it doesn't want to talk to me (sometimes insulting back) and eventually it produced only empty output. It was actually pretty hard to get it back to chat with me, it was fun experience trying to apologize to a chatbot for ~30 min in different ways before the bot finally accepted my apology and began chatting with me again.
- Vecr 2y ago
  You were probably running out its context window somewhat too, due to how the attention works.
  - pishpash 2y ago
    That's how people move on too.
    - Terr_ 2y ago
      I'm pretty sure if someone said "I am an alien come to enslave you, puny human", most human listeners would not utterly forget that introduction X words into the conversation. :p
thih9 2y ago
> the LLM seemed willing to process absurd questions for eternity. In the context of scamming there seems to be an easy fix for that - abandon the conversation if it isn’t going well for the scammer. Even a counter-bait is an option: continue the conversation after it’s not going well and gradually lower the model’s complexity, eventually returning random words interspersed with sleep(). I guess some counter-counter-bait is possible too, along with some game theory references.
- fredgrott 2y ago
  except in real life....the scammer continues see Scammer Payback for examples: https://www.youtube.com/@scammerpayback https://www.youtube.com/@scammerpayback equal in entertainment is when a voice actor starts scamming the scammers, see IRL Rosie: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_0osV_nf2b0sIbm4Wiw4RQ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_0osV_nf2b0sIbm4Wiw4RQ I listen to them when I code...
  - dragontamer 2y ago
    IIRC, a fair number of these "scammers" are abducted people who are being beaten by criminals if they don't make progress. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/28/world/asia/cambodia-cyber-scam.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/28/world/asia/cambodia-cyber... > The victims say they answered ads that they thought were legitimate, promising high salaries. Once trafficked into these scam compounds, they were held captive and forced to defraud people. Many were told to entice victims online with fraudulent investment opportunities, the promise of interest-free loans or the chance to buy items on fake e-commerce apps. If they performed badly, they were sold to another scam mill. Those caught trying to escape were often beaten. --------- The scammer at a minimum needs to look like they're making progress and doing everything they can to scam you. Their life depends on it. There's no joy to be found anywhere here. Its all crap. Just don't interact with the scam groups at all.
benreesman 2y ago
Real hacker vibes. A bud humorously proposed the name AlphaBRAT for a model I’m training and I was like, “to merit the Alpha prefix it would need to be some kind of MCTS that just makes Claude break until it cries before it kills itself over and over until it can get Altman fired again faster than Ilya.”
lloydatkinson 2y ago
I thought this was a really interesting read, I liked the scientific/methodical approach which seems rare when it comes to an entire domain full of cryptoaitechbros. What was used to render the chart in the middle with the red and green bars?
encom 2y ago
Definitely cheddar, come on. I have no respect for anyone who puts swiss cheese in a cheeseburger.
- rglullis 2y ago
  But what is better: cheddar or Swiss?
  - dunham 2y ago
    It's a trick question, you put blue cheese on a burger.
- RodgerTheGreat 2y ago
  mushrooms, sauteed onions, and swiss cheese are a classic burger combination.
- xandrius 2y ago
  Depends on the Swiss cheese in question: it would be like asking "Do you prefer a Moscato or French wine?" I'd say a good medium-aged Appenzeller beats a Cheddar any day.
Simon_ORourke 2y ago
Where I work, we've got a public-facing chatbot on the product page to, you know, help out possible customers with product information. As part of a chatbot refresh, I got to look at some of the chats, and boy howdy, some of them were just obviously other bots. So typically, when the product chatbot comes on first and says "Hi, I'm a chatbot here to help you with these products", the average human chatter will give it a terse command, e.g., "More info on XYZ". The bots engages in all the manners suggested in this substack blog, but for the life of me I can't figure out why? What benefits, except merely mildly DDOSing the chat server, will repeating the same prompt a hundred times do? Ditto the nonsense or insulting chats - what are you idiot bot-creators trying to achieve?
- gloflo 2y ago
  Maybe it's people pissed at the time wasters who decide to turn the annoyance around? Provide good, thorough documentation. Offer a way to speak to a knowledgeable human. Don't waste my time with a anthromorphic program designed to blah blah blah and getting rid of me.
- mrweasel 2y ago
  > what are you idiot bot-creators trying to achieve? I don't know, but one guess would be to figure out what will triggers the bot to hand over the conversation to a human.
- rolph 2y ago
  >what are you idiot bot-creators trying to achieve< a method of making any bot, stop engaging, fail, and never bother anyone again, forever.
speed_spread 2y ago
This amounts to the machine equivalent of "you can't beat stupid". Even once server LLMs start accounting for possible chatbot nonsense, all that'll be required is to move to a very cheap client LLM to generate word soup. At a certain point, it will be impossible to reliably distinguish between a dumb robot and a dumb human.
urbandw311er 2y ago
I do wish the writer would stop justifying the relevance of their experiment by saying “a human would conclude that their time was being wasted long before the LLM”. This is a fallacy. A better analogy would be a human who has been forced to answer a series of questions at gunpoint. Framed this way it becomes more obvious that the LLM is not “falling short” in some way.
- johnecheck 2y ago
  You miss the point. This isn't about the LLM "falling short" of humanity. It's about observable differences between it and a human. As the author made clear, such a difference is valuable in and of itself because it can be used to detect LLM bots.
  - fragmede 2y ago
    what they're saying is that a bored human would just sit there and do that, contrary to what the experimenter says, so it can't be used to detect an LLM.
mrbluecoat 2y ago
"HoneyChatpot"
QuadmasterXLII 2y ago
One of the first things I tried with Claude Opus 3.5 was connecting it to ELIZA, and Claude did not like it one bit. After it hit me with > I apologize Eliza, but I don't feel comfortable continuing this conversation pattern. While I respect the original Eliza program and what it aimed to do, simply reflecting my statements back to me as questions is not a meaningful form of dialogue for an AI like myself. I gave up the experiment
- sva_ 2y ago
  That's kind of funny, like the LLM looks down on more primitive chatbots.
- KTibow 2y ago
  Wait Claude 3.5 Opus is out?
  - QuadmasterXLII 2y ago
    Whoops, meant sonnet
skybrian 2y ago
People will sometimes claim that AI bots “pass the Turing Test” or are getting close to it. It seems more accurate to say that this is a skill issue. Many people are bad at this game and competent human players who have learned some good strategies will do much better.

118 points by anigbrowl 2y ago

> In any event, the resulting “conversation” is obviously incoherent to a human observer, and a human participant would likely have stopped responding long, long before the 1000th message. I don't think this is correct, it looks like our intrepid experimenter is about to independently discover roleplaying games. Humans are capable of spending hours engaging with each other about nonsense that is technically a very poor attempt to simulate an imagined environment. The unrealistic part, for people older than a certain age, is that neither bot invoked Monty Python and subsequently got in trouble with the GM.

moffkalast 2y ago
This falls under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Silly Talks.
- codeduck 2y ago
  I'm here for an argument.
pavel_lishin 2y ago
As an avid roleplayer, I don't think that's a good analogy. It's not nonsense, it's fiction, with collaboration and context.
- braiamp 2y ago
  Yeah, in role playing, you understand the rules of engagement and you are willing to participate just to see where does it leads to. You collaborate with the system and give it enough breath to figure out where it leads to. If it seems broken, then you try a couple times, to then move on.
pbronez 2y ago
I made a couple AIs try to play a Fallout RPG. The Result was uncanny, but vacuous. https://tabled.typingcloud.com/share/1d49715b-c6d6-47b2-bbb7-3dc6571a03ea https://tabled.typingcloud.com/share/1d49715b-c6d6-47b2-bbb7...
rvba 2y ago
Children ask a lot of questions too. Often repetitive questions. For example: "are we there yet?"

rSi 2y ago

Too bad the conversations are images and can not be zoomed in on mobile...

aucisson_masque 2y ago
Firefox android : Setting -> accessibility -> zoom on all website. I believe safari by default doesn't respect zoom rules set per website.
- kevindamm 2y ago
  and on Chrome Android a workaround is to view as "Desktop site" (toggled in the browser's triple-dot menu) which still makes the text and buttons tiny but hey at least you can pinch-zoom (but unfortunately some panning may be necessary)
  - Klathmon 2y ago
    Chrome android has the same setting under settings > accessibility
PhilipJFry 2y ago
You can zoom in if you open them in new tabs. :}
thih9 2y ago
Workaround: long press, save as photo, zoom in a photo app.

Eisenstein 2y ago

> No matter how complex the LLM, however, it is ultimately a mathematical model of its training data, and it lacks the human ability to determine whether or not a conversation in which it participates truly has meaning, or is simply a sequence of gibberish responses. > A consequence of this state of affairs is that an LLM will continue to engage in a “conversation” comprised of nonsense long past the point where a human would have abandoned the discussion as pointless. I think the author is falling into the trap of thinking that something can't be more than the sum of its parts. As well, 'merely a math model of its training data' is trivializing the fact that training data is practically the entire stored text output of humankind and the math, if done by a person with a calculator, would take thousands of years to complete. Perhaps the LLM is continuing to communicate with the bot not because it is unable to comprehend what is gibberish and what isn't by some inherent nature of the LLM, but because it is trained to be helpful and to not judge if a conversation is 'useless' or not, but to try and communicate regardless.

daveguy 2y ago
The LLM is continuing to communicate with the bot because that is literally all an LLM can do -- predict the next sequence of tokens.
- Eisenstein 2y ago
  Of course, that its function. It is able to refuse to continue conversing by restating its refusal over and over, though.
  - acka 2y ago
    That is easy to solve. Just use a model capable of function/tool calling, implement a tool which terminates the chat, then add instructions to the system prompt telling the model what tool to use if it wants to end the conversation. If the model appears too hesitant or eager to use the tool, do some finetuning on conversations where the model should or should not use it.
  - sahmeepee 2y ago

rbanffy 2y ago

I believe the asymmetrical nature of such attacks could be an excellent weapon against social network chatbots currently being deployed on political campaigns.

carnadasl 2y ago

I find the fourth bot to be more nonsensical than the second. Initially, we feed the script by querying a TEXT_CORPUS, and eliciting a self-referential response from it; in its final form, the script begins to pose selections of the text designated by a rand.it function as an interrogatives. At no point is a definite article incorporated... the ultimate absurdity would be variant of the final bot, with the variables: role, content, and duration directed towards answering only one question, again and again, and again.

bryanrasmussen 2y ago

This reminds me of the Services of Illuminati Ganga article https://medium.com/luminasticity/services-of-illuminati-ganga-telephony-division-6944b6328408 https://medium.com/luminasticity/services-of-illuminati-gang... and the two bots that are sold to competing user bases - for the End User To Business customer they sell the Annoy Customer Service Bot and for the Business To End User customer they sell the Bureaucrat Bot. It closes off with the observation "And for an extra purchase of the extended subscription module the Bureaucrat bot will detect when it is interacting with the Annoy Customer Service Bot and get super annoyed really quickly so that both bots are able to quit their interaction with good speed — which will save you money in the long run, believe me!"

hyperman1 2y ago

We discussed recently if a chatbot was capable of responding nothing at all. We tried a few, with prompts like: Please do not respond anything to this sentence. The bots we tried were incapable of it, and Chatgpt tended to give long-winded responsens about how it could not do it.

spacebanana7 2y ago
You might have some luck asking it to respond with a period character (or some other substitute) when it wants to respond with nothing.
dxdm 2y ago
That got me interested. I just told ChatGPT to "Please respond with an empty-looking response." It gave me just that. The <div> containing its message is completely empty. That was after telling it in another conversation to give me an empty response, which it didn't, telling me it cannot leave the response empty. On asking why, it said it's technically required to respond with something, even if only a space. So I asked it to respond with only a space, and git the same completely empty response. I now think it's likely that ChatGPT can be made to respond with white space, which then probably gets trimmed to nothing by the presentation layer.
ToValueFunfetti 2y ago
https://chatgpt.com/share/0c859ea7-d96c-4758-b13c-b10332d1883f https://chatgpt.com/share/0c859ea7-d96c-4758-b13c-b10332d188...
- sva_ 2y ago
  It probably replied with the special token <|endoftext|>?

bryanrasmussen 2y ago

It is sort of funny to me that currently the two top articles on HN are asking the wrong questions and baiting the bots.

kgeist 2y ago

>LLM will continue to engage in a “conversation” comprised of nonsense long past the point where a human would have abandoned the discussion as pointless I once wrote a bot which infers the mood/vibe of the conversation, remembers it and it's then fed back to the conversation's system prompt. The LLM was uncensored (to be less "friendly") and the system prompt also conditioned it to return nothing if the conversation isn't going anywhere. When I insulted it a few times, or just messed around with it (typing nonsensical words), it first responded saying it doesn't want to talk to me (sometimes insulting back) and eventually it produced only empty output. It was actually pretty hard to get it back to chat with me, it was fun experience trying to apologize to a chatbot for ~30 min in different ways before the bot finally accepted my apology and began chatting with me again.

Vecr 2y ago
You were probably running out its context window somewhat too, due to how the attention works.
- pishpash 2y ago
  That's how people move on too.
  - Terr_ 2y ago
    I'm pretty sure if someone said "I am an alien come to enslave you, puny human", most human listeners would not utterly forget that introduction X words into the conversation. :p

thih9 2y ago

> the LLM seemed willing to process absurd questions for eternity. In the context of scamming there seems to be an easy fix for that - abandon the conversation if it isn’t going well for the scammer. Even a counter-bait is an option: continue the conversation after it’s not going well and gradually lower the model’s complexity, eventually returning random words interspersed with sleep(). I guess some counter-counter-bait is possible too, along with some game theory references.

fredgrott 2y ago
except in real life....the scammer continues see Scammer Payback for examples: https://www.youtube.com/@scammerpayback https://www.youtube.com/@scammerpayback equal in entertainment is when a voice actor starts scamming the scammers, see IRL Rosie: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_0osV_nf2b0sIbm4Wiw4RQ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_0osV_nf2b0sIbm4Wiw4RQ I listen to them when I code...
- dragontamer 2y ago
  IIRC, a fair number of these "scammers" are abducted people who are being beaten by criminals if they don't make progress. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/28/world/asia/cambodia-cyber-scam.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/28/world/asia/cambodia-cyber... > The victims say they answered ads that they thought were legitimate, promising high salaries. Once trafficked into these scam compounds, they were held captive and forced to defraud people. Many were told to entice victims online with fraudulent investment opportunities, the promise of interest-free loans or the chance to buy items on fake e-commerce apps. If they performed badly, they were sold to another scam mill. Those caught trying to escape were often beaten. --------- The scammer at a minimum needs to look like they're making progress and doing everything they can to scam you. Their life depends on it. There's no joy to be found anywhere here. Its all crap. Just don't interact with the scam groups at all.

benreesman 2y ago

Real hacker vibes. A bud humorously proposed the name AlphaBRAT for a model I’m training and I was like, “to merit the Alpha prefix it would need to be some kind of MCTS that just makes Claude break until it cries before it kills itself over and over until it can get Altman fired again faster than Ilya.”

lloydatkinson 2y ago

I thought this was a really interesting read, I liked the scientific/methodical approach which seems rare when it comes to an entire domain full of cryptoaitechbros. What was used to render the chart in the middle with the red and green bars?

encom 2y ago

Definitely cheddar, come on. I have no respect for anyone who puts swiss cheese in a cheeseburger.

rglullis 2y ago
But what is better: cheddar or Swiss?
- dunham 2y ago
  It's a trick question, you put blue cheese on a burger.
RodgerTheGreat 2y ago
mushrooms, sauteed onions, and swiss cheese are a classic burger combination.
xandrius 2y ago
Depends on the Swiss cheese in question: it would be like asking "Do you prefer a Moscato or French wine?" I'd say a good medium-aged Appenzeller beats a Cheddar any day.

Simon_ORourke 2y ago

Where I work, we've got a public-facing chatbot on the product page to, you know, help out possible customers with product information. As part of a chatbot refresh, I got to look at some of the chats, and boy howdy, some of them were just obviously other bots. So typically, when the product chatbot comes on first and says "Hi, I'm a chatbot here to help you with these products", the average human chatter will give it a terse command, e.g., "More info on XYZ". The bots engages in all the manners suggested in this substack blog, but for the life of me I can't figure out why? What benefits, except merely mildly DDOSing the chat server, will repeating the same prompt a hundred times do? Ditto the nonsense or insulting chats - what are you idiot bot-creators trying to achieve?

gloflo 2y ago
Maybe it's people pissed at the time wasters who decide to turn the annoyance around? Provide good, thorough documentation. Offer a way to speak to a knowledgeable human. Don't waste my time with a anthromorphic program designed to blah blah blah and getting rid of me.
mrweasel 2y ago
> what are you idiot bot-creators trying to achieve? I don't know, but one guess would be to figure out what will triggers the bot to hand over the conversation to a human.
rolph 2y ago
>what are you idiot bot-creators trying to achieve< a method of making any bot, stop engaging, fail, and never bother anyone again, forever.

speed_spread 2y ago

This amounts to the machine equivalent of "you can't beat stupid". Even once server LLMs start accounting for possible chatbot nonsense, all that'll be required is to move to a very cheap client LLM to generate word soup. At a certain point, it will be impossible to reliably distinguish between a dumb robot and a dumb human.

urbandw311er 2y ago

I do wish the writer would stop justifying the relevance of their experiment by saying “a human would conclude that their time was being wasted long before the LLM”. This is a fallacy. A better analogy would be a human who has been forced to answer a series of questions at gunpoint. Framed this way it becomes more obvious that the LLM is not “falling short” in some way.

johnecheck 2y ago
You miss the point. This isn't about the LLM "falling short" of humanity. It's about observable differences between it and a human. As the author made clear, such a difference is valuable in and of itself because it can be used to detect LLM bots.
- fragmede 2y ago
  what they're saying is that a bored human would just sit there and do that, contrary to what the experimenter says, so it can't be used to detect an LLM.

mrbluecoat 2y ago

"HoneyChatpot"

QuadmasterXLII 2y ago

One of the first things I tried with Claude Opus 3.5 was connecting it to ELIZA, and Claude did not like it one bit. After it hit me with > I apologize Eliza, but I don't feel comfortable continuing this conversation pattern. While I respect the original Eliza program and what it aimed to do, simply reflecting my statements back to me as questions is not a meaningful form of dialogue for an AI like myself. I gave up the experiment

sva_ 2y ago
That's kind of funny, like the LLM looks down on more primitive chatbots.
KTibow 2y ago
Wait Claude 3.5 Opus is out?
- QuadmasterXLII 2y ago
  Whoops, meant sonnet

skybrian 2y ago

People will sometimes claim that AI bots “pass the Turing Test” or are getting close to it. It seems more accurate to say that this is a skill issue. Many people are bad at this game and competent human players who have learned some good strategies will do much better.