3 ms·

> Which means even if it is a mindless bot, by virtue of human psychology, the user will become more trusting and reliant on the LLM, even if they have doubts a

> Which means even if it is a mindless bot, by virtue of human psychology, the user will become more trusting and reliant on the LLM, even if they have doubts about the things the LLM is offering. I'm sceptical of this claim. At least for me, when humans do this I find it shallow and inauthentic. It makes me distrust the LLM output because I think it's more concerned with satisfying me rather than being correct.

blooalien 1y ago
> I'm sceptical of this claim. At least for me, when humans do this I find it shallow and inauthentic. 100% agree, but it depends entirely on the individual human's views. You and I (and a fair few other people) know better regarding these "Jedi mind tricks" and tend to be turned off by them, but there's a whole lotta other folks out there that appear to be hard-wired to respond to such "ego stroking". > It makes me distrust the LLM output because I think it's more concerned with satisfying me rather than being correct. Again, I totally agree. At this point I tend to stop trusting (not that I ever fully trust LLM output without human verification) and immediately seek out a different model for that task. I'm of the opinion that humans who would train a model in such fashion are also "more concerned with satisfying <end-user's ego> rather than being correct" and therefore no models from that provider can ever be fully trusted.