[jibal]

One needs to be more than "reasonably skeptical" and merely not "low intelligence gullible" to be a competent TT judge--it requires skill, experience, and understanding an LLM's weak spots.

And the "customer service voice" you see is one that is intentionally programmed in by the vendors via baseline rules. They can be programmed differently--or overridden by appropriate prompts--to have a very different tone.

LLMs trained on trillions of human-generated text fragments available from the internet have shown that the TT is simply not an adequate test for identifying whether a machine is "thinking"--which was Turing's original intent in his 1950 paper "Computing Machinery and Intelligence" in which he introduced the test (which he called "the imitation game").

[bluefirebrand]

It's actually trivial, even with the best LLMs on the market:

Try to rapidly change the conversation to a wildly different subject

Humans will resist this, or say some final "closing comments"

Even the absolute best LLMs will happily go wherever they are led, without commenting remotely on topic shifts

Try it out

Edit: This isn't even a terribly contrived example by the way. It is an example of how some people with ADHD navigate normal conversations sometimes

[shawabawa3]

Gemini is pretty good at resisting this

https://aistudio.google.com/app/prompts/1dxV3NoYHo6Mv36uPRjk...

It was doing so well until the last question :rip: but it's normal that you can jailbreak a user prompt with another user prompt, I think with system prompts it would be a lot harder

[jibal]

It is trivial for those who have "skill, experience, and understanding an LLM's weak spots", but as some many comments indicate, most people do not.