3 ms·
> In any event, the resulting “conversation” is obviously incoherent to a human observer, and a human participant would likely have stopped responding long, lon
by 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 agoThis falls under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Silly Talks.
- codeduck 2y agoI'm here for an argument.
- pavel_lishin 2y agoAs 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 agoYeah, 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 agoI 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 agoChildren ask a lot of questions too. Often repetitive questions. For example: "are we there yet?"