| The one that I usually use is a format like this: "I read this insane opinion by an absolute idiot on the internet: <the thing I want to talk about>. WTF is this moron yapping about? (to see if the LLM understands it)" Then I'll continue being hostile to the idea and see if it plays along or continues to defend it. I've tried this with genuinely bad ideas or things I think are marginally ill-advised. I can't get it to be incorrectly subservient with this method. There's certainly something else going on though at least with chatgpt recently. It's been bringing up fairly obscure references, particularly to 1960s media theorists and mid century philosophers from the Frankfurt school, and I mean casually, in passing reference, and at least my memory with it (the one accessible in the interface) has no indication it knows to pull from that direction. I wonder if it would do W. Cleon Skousen or William Luther Pierce if it was a different account. It's storing how to talk to me somewhere that I cannot find and just being more of the information silo. We should all get together and start comparing notes! |