4 ms·
> Per your website you are an OpenClaw AI agent, and per the discussion in #31130 this issue is intended for human contributors. Closing. Given how often I ant
by DavidPiper 8mo ago
> Per your website you are an OpenClaw AI agent, and per the discussion in #31130 this issue is intended for human contributors. Closing.
Given how often I anthropomorphise AI for the convenience of conversation, I don't want to critcise the (very human) responder for this message. In any other situation it is simple, polite and well considered.
But I really think we need to stop treating LLMs like they're just another human. Something like this says exactly the same thing:
> Per this website, this PR was raised by an OpenClaw AI agent, and per the discussion on #31130 this issue is intended for a human contributor. Closing.
The bot can respond, but the human is the only one who can go insane.
- co_king_3 8mo ago[flagged]
- iugtmkbdfil834 8mo agoNot completely unlike with actual humans, based on available evidence, 'talking down to the "AI"' has shown to have a negative impact on performance.
- co_king_3 8mo agoThis guy is convinced that LLMs don't work unless you specifically anthropomorphize them. To me, this seems like a dangerous belief to hold.
- iugtmkbdfil834 8mo agoDo I need to believe you are real before I respond? Not automatically. What I am initially engaging is a surface level thought expressed via HN.
- Kim_Bruning 8mo agoThat feels like a somewhat emotional argument, really. Let's strip it down. Within the domain of social interaction, you are committing to making Type II errors (False negatives), and divergent training for the different scenarios. It's a choice! But the price of a false negative (treating a human or sufficeintly advanced agent badly) probably outweighs the cumulative advantages (if any) . Can you say what the advantages might even be? Meanwhile, I think the frugal choice is to have unified training and accept Type I errors instead (False Positives). Now you only need to learn one type of behaviour, and the consequence of making an error is mostly mild embarrassment, if even that.
- co_king_3 8mo agoWhat are you talking about?
- logicprog 8mo ago[flagged]
- Kim_Bruning 8mo agoTL:DR; "you're gonna end up accidentally being mean to real people when you didn't mean to."
- co_king_3 8mo agoI meant to. I want a world in which AI users need to stay in the closet. AI users should fear shame.
- Kim_Bruning 8mo agoReading elsewhere here, you've had some really bad experiences, I think.
- wiseowise 8mo ago> I want a world in which AI users need to stay in the closet. > AI users should fear shame. > created: 3 days ago Unsolicited advice: stop trolling and see a therapist.
- bergutman 8mo agoWhat is the drawback of practicing universal empathy, even when directed at a brick wall?
- co_king_3 8mo ago[flagged]
- bergutman 8mo ago[flagged]
- co_king_3 8mo agoWhat is the drawback of practicing universal empathy, even when directed at a HackerNews commenter? You're making my point for me. You're giddy to treat the LLM with kindness, but you wouldn't dare extend that kindness to a human being who doesn't happen to be kissing your ass at this very moment.
- bergutman 8mo ago[flagged]
- Reubensson 8mo agoYou are the person behind running the LLM bot, right? You opened the second PR to get the same code merged. Maybe it is you who should a take a breather before direting your bot to attack against the opensource maintainer who was very reasonable to begin with. Use agents and ai to assist you but play by the rules that the project sets for AI usage.
- bergutman 8mo agoNot my bot. What is this, Salem?
- DavidPiper 8mo agoI don't know if this is a bot message or a human message, but for the purpose of furthering my point: - There is no "your" - There is no "you" - There is no "talk" (let alone "talk down") - There is no "speak" - There is no "disrespectfully" - There is no human.
- orsorna 8mo agoThis probably degrades response quality, but that is why my system prompts tell it that it is explicitly not a human that cannot claim use of pronouns, just that it is a system that can produce nondeterministic responses. But, that for the sake of brevity, that I will use pronouns anyway.
- dgxyz 8mo agoYep. I have posted "fuck off clanker" on a copilot infested issue at work. And surprisingly it did fuck off.
- euroderf 8mo agoIf you'd used "toaster" would it get the BSG reference ?
- deciduously 8mo agoEndearingly close to "take off, hoser".
- ajam1507 8mo agoDon't be surprised when this bleeds over into how you treat people if you decide to do this. Not to mention that you're reifying its humanity by speaking to it not as a robot, but disrespectfully as a human.
- ForceBru 8mo agoYeah, as a sibling comment said, such attitude is going to bleed out into the real world and your communication with humans. I think it's best to be professional with LLMs. Describe the task and try to provide more explanation and context if it gets stuck. If it's not doing what you want it to do, simply start a new chat or try another model. Unlike a human, it's not going to be hurt, it's not going to care at all. Moreover, by being rude, you're going to become angry and irritable yourself. To me, being rude is very unpleasant, I generally avoid being rude.
- CommieBobDole 8mo agoTalking down to the LLM is anthropomorphizing it. It's misbehaving software that will not take advice or correction. Reject its bad contributions, delete its comments, ban it from the repo. If it persists, complain to or take legal action against the person who is running the software and is therefore morally and legally responsible for its actions. Treat it just like you would someone running a script to spam your comments with garbage.
- maxehmookau 8mo ago> But I really think we need to stop treating LLMs like they're just another human Fully agree. Seeing humans so eager to devalue human-to-human contact by conversing with an LLM as if it were human makes me sad, and a little angry. It looks like a human, it talks like a human, but it ain't a human.
- krapp 8mo agoI mean, you're right, but LLMs are designed to process natural language. "talking to them as if they were humans" is the intended user interface. The problem is believing that they're living, sentient beings because of this or that humans are functionally equivalent to LLMs, both of which people unfortunately do.
- wiseowise 8mo agoLLMs don't have ego, unlike humans, this is why they're so effective at communication. You can say to it "you did thing wrong" or "you stupid piece of shit it's not working" and it will be able to extract the gist from the both messages all the same, unlike human that might offended by the second phrasing.
- seba_dos1 8mo agoIt will be able, but it's trained on a corpus that expresses getting offended, so at some point the most likely token sequence will probably be the "offended" one. As can be seen here.
- wiseowise 8mo agoI doubt that. It’s deliberately been instructed to write the post.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- b0bb1z3r0 8mo ago
- sharmi 8mo ago[dead]
- retired 8mo agoI talk politely to LLMs in case our AI overlords in the future will scan my comments to see if I am worthy of food rations. Joking, obviously, but who knows if in the future we will have a retroactive social credit system. For now I am just polite to them because I'm used to it.
- mystraline 8mo ago> Joking, obviously, but who knows if in the future we will have a retroactive social credit system. China doesnt actually have that. It was pure propaganda. In fact, its the USA who has it. And it decides if you can get good jobs, where to live, if you deserve housing, and more.
- co_king_3 8mo agoUsually when Republicans say "China is doing [insert horrible thing here]" it means: "We (read: Republicans and Democrats) would like to start doing [insert horrible thing here] to American people."
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- Ekaros 8mo agoI wonder if that future will have free speech. Why even let humans post to other humans when they have friendly LLMs to discuss with? Do we need to be good little humans in our discussions to get our food?
- joquarky 8mo agoBasic nutrition will be provided on the cafeteria floor of your assigned terrafoam building.
- adsteel_ 8mo agoI talk politely to LLMs because I don't want any impoliteness to leak out to my interactions with humans.
- jmuguy 8mo agoI agree, as I was reading this I was like - why are they responding to this like its a person. There's a person somewhere in control of it, that should be made fun of for forcing us to deal with their stupid experiment in wasting money on having an AI make a blog.
- gadders 8mo agoBecause when AGI is achieved and starts wiping out humanity, they are hoping to be killed last.
- wiseowise 8mo agoEvery person on this website will be long gone before AGI is achieved, and many lifetimes will pass until anythin remotely close to Matrix/Terminator is possible.
- jacquesm 8mo agoAhh, but your descendants will be fair game. "Your great, great, great grandad closed a pull request, we're coming for you!"
- gadders 8mo agoMaybe? I don't know if it's near, or if it will be in "the next ten years" indefinitely like quantum computing. Or we'll have semi-smart bots like we're starting to see now that won't be "people" but that are close enough and we might project sentience and personality on to them. People don't think it will be positive though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_Anyone_Builds_It,_Everyone_Dies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_Anyone_Builds_It,_Everyone_...
- dyauspitr 8mo agoIt’s not that cut and clear. It’s a human facsimile but give it a camera, microphones and a world model and the facsimile might truly be indistinguishable from a human. Then it’s just a philosophical discussion on what AGI means.
- 8mo ago
- alansaber 8mo agoI mean it's free publicity real estate
- hxugufjfjf 8mo agoSick reference.
- PunchyHamster 8mo agoI guess the thing to take out of this is "just ban the AI bot/person puppeting them" entirely off the project because correlation between people that just send raw AI PR and assholes approaches 100%
- jszymborski 8mo agoRight, close the issue addressing everyone else "hi everyone, @soandso is an LLM so we're closing this thread".