[imtringued]

If I asked you what 5+3+9 is, then you wouldn't be allowed to calculate the intermediate values inside your head. Is it really that hard to believe that humans have internal thoughts and that they think before they speak? Is it really such a revelation that I have to remind you of it?

[knome]

Creating a small group of bot 'personalities' that have an internal dialog, generating and sharing intermediate values before coming to a consensus and issuing a response to a user is trivial. I did it in my earliest experiments with GPT-3

You could use the same framework to generate an internal dialog for a bot.

A lot of people don't think before they speak. If you tell me you have a small conversation with yourself before each thing you say out loud during a conversation, I will have doubts. Quick wit and fast paced conversation do not leave time for any real internal narration, just "stream of consciousness".

There is a time for carefully choosing and reflecting on your words, surely, but there are many times staying in tune with a real time conversation takes precedence.

[littlestymaar]

> Creating a small group of bot 'personalities' that have an internal dialog, generating and sharing intermediate values before coming to a consensus and issuing a response to a user is trivial. I did it in my earliest experiments with GPT-3

> You could use the same framework to generate an internal dialog for a bot.

We can, for sure. But will it works? Given my (admittedly limited) experience with feeding LLM-generated stuff back in the LLM, I'd suspect it may actually lower the output quality. But maybe fine-tuning for this specific work-case could be a solution to this problem, as I suspect the instruction-tuning to be a culprit in the poor behavior I've witnessed (the bots have been instruction-tuned to believe the human, and apologize if you tell them they've made mistakes for instance, even if they were right in the first place, so this blind trust is likely polluting the results).

[Workaccount2]

Here is the rub; even when you "stop and think" it's still just a stream of consciousness. The internal decisions about what to say arise out of the same mental abyss as "stream of consciousness" thoughts.

If you pay attention, you can catch that it is all just an illusion.

[CuriouslyC]

You make it sound binary. We have a thought process ongoing at all times - sometimes we wait to respond for that process to accumulate more information, and sometimes we fire off right away, but the information processing engine is running in the background regardless.

[Grimblewald]

Check out you.com genuius mode, it does internal dialogue of sorts, which you can open up and explore. The same is true for many "agent" based systems. It turns out giving LLMs the ability to talk through problems with themsleves massivly improves their abilities. Same as using chain of thought prompting.