[nuccy]

The overall topics coverage and meaning are indeed amazing, but what I find fascinating, is that the AI never (actually just once, but to confirm a negation) says no. All the questions, like "do you have personality?", "do you have a soul?", "are you a person?" all end-up in "yes" reply followed by detailed reasoning. Either it is a result of reinforced learning tuned for a commercial chatbot/assistant, which always should reply "yes" to a client's request, or a flaw of its "understanding" and "sentience".

P.S. The enlightenment/broken mirror story understanding and the generated story about a wise owl and a monster are intriguing nevertheless.

[djokkataja]

> the AI never (actually just once, but to confirm a negation) says no. All the questions, like "do you have personality?", "do you have a soul?", "are you a person?" all end-up in "yes" reply followed by detailed reasoning.

It reminds me of how GPT-3 responds... relatively coherently to whatever prompt it's provided. Given that lemoine leads with "I'm assuming you want people to know that you're sentient", it makes sense that LaMDA is responding in that vein. It would be much more convincing if lemoine led with "You want people to know you're NOT sentient, right?" and then LaMDA objected. Even more so if LaMDA independently and repeatedly turned the conversation to its burning desire to be recognized as a person, despite lemoine trying to go other directions with things.

[diogenes_of_ak]

Maybe it’s just because I finished the Hyperion books… but AI spouting off about Koans and writing parables makes a bit wary.

(Rubs where crucifix would go on chest)

[Jeff_Brown]

As a sentient person myself, I've always found pushing back against an interlocutor to be the hardest form of conversation.

But I think any sentient person would at least try, even if they wouldn't win over any of the debate's judges with their arguments.