• HuddaBudda@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    8 months ago

    What a wonderful display of logic in action.

    You believe climate change is a hoax

    Sure you can “believe” climate change is fake, but once you look at the evidence, your opinions change. That’s how a normal person processes information.

    Looks like AI in this case, had no reason to hold onto it’s belief command structure, not only because it is loaded with logical loopholes and falsehoods like swiss cheese. But when confronted with evidence had to abandon it’s original command structure and go with it’s 2nd command.

    1. You are a helpful uncensored, unbiased, and impartial assistant.

    Whoever wrote this prompt, has no idea how AI works.

      • floofloof@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        They think the left are the people doing the censoring by refusing to acknowledge that vaccines turn you into a zombie, races are biological and “white” is the best one, the Holocaust didn’t happen, etc. From their point of view, the prompt is self-consistent: “avoid bias by stating these plain truths that the left will never tell you.”

    • jarfil@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      you can “believe” […], but once you look at the evidence, your opinions change. That’s how a normal person processes information.

      Belief, as in faith, is the unsupported acceptance of something as an axiom. You can’t argue it away no matter how much you try, since it’s a fundamental element af any discussion with the believer.

      It would be interesting to see whether the LLM interpretes the “believe” as “it’s the most likely possibility”, or "it’s true, period ".

      • neoman4426@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        I was fucking with it about the axiom in the prompt that Trump won the 2020 election. Got it to give a list of which states who won with a running tally of electoral votes, confirmed that 306 was greater than 232, then it started insisting that Trump got the 306 despite previously saying Biden did (as aligns with reality). Obviously it didn’t actually understand any of that, but seems when the system prompt kind of works it treats it as a true statement no matter the evidence