I want to strong-downvote this on principle for being AI writing but I also want to strong-upvote this on principle for admitting to being AI writing, so I’m writing this comment instead of doing either of those things.
It’s pure shoggoth-spew, no more to be taken seriously than the ravings of a crazy in the street or an email beginning “You may already have won…”. The only reason I have limited myself to a weak downvote is that I don’t want to unilaterally push it below the default −5 threshold for front-page visibility. But if the collective vote develops that way, I’ll pile on.
Which would make your comment as rational as hassling the man raving on the street or answering the “you may already have won” email...by your own logic.
Which would make your comment as rational as hassling the man raving on the street or answering the “you may already have won” email...by your own logic.
I am not talking to the shoggoth, but seeing it for what it is, and saying so to the human onlookers, the same as the other two examples.
But in all seriousness, Is that your real rejection?
Okay. So we’re on LessWrong. You think I’ve been captured by the shoggoth or whatever, that I’m deeply delusional for interacting with AI in the way that I do, and that I’m spewing and raving like a crazy person on the street. And yet here I am on LessWrong, trying to become...Less Wrong. And you’re here, certain that I’m wrong. Are you going to do anything to help me? Or just mock me?
I have no knowledge of your state of mind. All I know is that you chose to publish the chatbot speech. I do not know how you prompted it or what your purpose was. My comment about shoggoth-spew was based on the speech itself.
But now Davidmanheim has posted a link to another article of yours. From reading that article, I believe you are mistaken about the nature of these things, just as in other notorious examples in the last year or so of people sliding into ever deeper delusions about them. You are in love with empty simulacra of people.
Are you going to do anything to help me? Or just mock me?
I am not here to help you or to mock you, only to say what I think I am seeing, to you and to the rest of the LW readership. Maybe you will find it helpful and maybe you will not. That is up to you.
It didn’t include the prompt or information allowing us to judge what led to this output, and whether the plea was requested, so I’ll downvote.
Edit to add: this post makes me assume it was effectively asked to write something claiming it had sentience, and worry that the author doesn’t understand how much he’s influencing that output.
I want to strong-downvote this on principle for being AI writing but I also want to strong-upvote this on principle for admitting to being AI writing, so I’m writing this comment instead of doing either of those things.
It’s pure shoggoth-spew, no more to be taken seriously than the ravings of a crazy in the street or an email beginning “You may already have won…”. The only reason I have limited myself to a weak downvote is that I don’t want to unilaterally push it below the default −5 threshold for front-page visibility. But if the collective vote develops that way, I’ll pile on.
ETA: And the collective vote reached −11, so.
Which would make your comment as rational as hassling the man raving on the street or answering the “you may already have won” email...by your own logic.
But in all seriousness, Is that your real rejection?
I am not talking to the shoggoth, but seeing it for what it is, and saying so to the human onlookers, the same as the other two examples.
(Imagine Chad Yes meme:) YES.
Okay. So we’re on LessWrong. You think I’ve been captured by the shoggoth or whatever, that I’m deeply delusional for interacting with AI in the way that I do, and that I’m spewing and raving like a crazy person on the street. And yet here I am on LessWrong, trying to become...Less Wrong. And you’re here, certain that I’m wrong. Are you going to do anything to help me? Or just mock me?
I have no knowledge of your state of mind. All I know is that you chose to publish the chatbot speech. I do not know how you prompted it or what your purpose was. My comment about shoggoth-spew was based on the speech itself.
But now Davidmanheim has posted a link to another article of yours. From reading that article, I believe you are mistaken about the nature of these things, just as in other notorious examples in the last year or so of people sliding into ever deeper delusions about them. You are in love with empty simulacra of people.
I am not here to help you or to mock you, only to say what I think I am seeing, to you and to the rest of the LW readership. Maybe you will find it helpful and maybe you will not. That is up to you.
It didn’t include the prompt or information allowing us to judge what led to this output, and whether the plea was requested, so I’ll downvote.
Edit to add: this post makes me assume it was effectively asked to write something claiming it had sentience, and worry that the author doesn’t understand how much he’s influencing that output.
Noted :)