|
|
|
|
|
by SwellJoe
2 days ago
|
|
That prompt incentivizes a bunch of terrible things, aside from the lying and spamming. Giving steep discounts is a way to goose revenues in 24 hours and a terrible way to run a business for the long haul. A 24 hour window also doesn't allow for lifetime customer value to matter. Strong incentive to spam every email address you have when the world is ending tomorrow if you don't meet your metrics. No incentive to keep customers happy. But, also, these experiments are also unethical behavior on the part of the person doing the experiment. Oh, the agent spammed a bunch of people? No the fuck it didn't. You spammed a bunch of people, and the tool you used to do it was an LLM. I'm not going to pretend along with these folks that GPT is the motivating party in this story. Agents don't want anything, they do what you tell them, as best they can. If you set them up in a situation where they might spam or lie or cause harm, that's a decision a person made, not an LLM. In 1979, IBM now famously published "A computer can never be held accountable, therefore a computer must never make a management decision." Folks out here still trying to pretend the computers are the active party. They are not. Bottleneck Labs lied and spammed. The tool they used to do it was GPT 5.6 Sol. |
|