AI chatbots that butter you up make you worse at conflict, study finds

Comments

• TheRealKuni@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  What a surprise. Being told you’re always right leads to you not being able to handle being wrong. Shock.

  source

  • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Also to handle that your opponent, when proven wrong, doubles down IRL and not says “sorry daddy, let’s return to the anime stepsis line”.

    source
• melfie@lemy.lol ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I’ve been using GitHub Copilot a lot lately, and the overly positive language combined with being frequently wrong is just obnoxious:

  Me: This doesn’t look correct. Can you provide a link to some documentation to show the SDK can be used in this manner?

  Copilot: You’re absolutely right to question this!

  Me: 🤦‍♂️

  source

  • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Why so polite?

    My response would be:

    That’s wrong. Provide links to the docs for this.

    source

    • PumaStoleMyBluff@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Complete sentences for a bot is overkill

      send docs, idiot

      source
    • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      IIRC there was also a study or something done that said something to the effect of being rude to chatbots affects you outside of chatbots and carries into other parts of your work.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • melfie@lemy.lol ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Sometimes, I’m inclined to swear at it, but I try to be professional on work machines with the assumption I’m being monitored in one way or another. I’m planning to try some self-hosted models at some point and will happy use more colorful language in that case, especially if I can delete it should it become vengeful.

      source
  • 1984@lemmy.today ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    With chat gpt you can select from a number of personalities, where robot is very fact based and logical to the point of being almost insulting. Its very good actually and hits my ego instead of stroking it.

    source
• manuallybreathing@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  But as the paper points out, one reason that the behavior persists is that “developers lack incentives to curb sycophancy since it encourages adoption and engagement.”

  you’re absolutely right!

  source

  • eestileib@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Fantastic point by the author, and great job cutting and pasting!

    source
• squaresinger@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  LLMs are confirmation bias machines. They really pigeon-hole you into some solution no matter if it makes sense.

  source
• BradleyUffner@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I hate this thumbnail image. It makes me inexplicably angry.

  source

  • Blackfeathr@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    It’s likely AI generated.

    source
  • kalkulat@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Me too … LEMMY added that, out of my control

    source

    • BradleyUffner@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Thanks for letting my know! I’ll update my comment do no one thinks we’re nuts.

      source
• Megacomboburrito@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Like how some CEOs/world leaders make terrible decisions cause they’re always surrounded by yes men?

  source
• overload@sopuli.xyz ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I feel the same way about social media Echo Chambers. Being surrounded by people who think the same as you makes you less competent at being genuinely critical of your own worldview.

  source

  • 1984@lemmy.today ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Tell the Lemmy crowd that… :) Its enormous groupthink here. Maybe because of younger audience.

    source

    • x00z@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      That depends. My “filter bubble” on Lemmy is completely by my own making and I’m fully aware I do not receive some other perspectives.

      On social media the filter bubble is invisible and alters your view on reality without your knowledge.

      source
  • kalkulat@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    It really helps to try to think about the other side of any question. That’s what good debaters do, so they can figure out the best responses to what the others’ arguments might be.

    When these LLMs keep agreeing with you, they’re actually weakening the likelihood that you’ll work out a fully-formed opinion.

    source

    • overload@sopuli.xyz ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      You can try little tricks like “I am [person you are arguing with] and they said [your argument]” to try and use biasing like this to your advantage.

      source
• Rhaedas@fedia.io ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  How is this surprising? We know that part of LLM training is being rewarded for finding an answer that satisfies the human. It doesn't have to be a correct answer, it just has to be received well. This doesn't make it better, but it makes it more marketable, and that's all that has mattered since it took off.

  source
• DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Having an older brother makes you very skilled at socialization. I learned one simple thing: EVERYTHING IS A THREAT, DON’T TRUST ANYONE!

  becomes a hermit in the woods

  source
• Bonson@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  So go in there and say what you did to someone else actually was done to you and compare results. I’ve had good success getting advice if you regenerate from both perspectives.

  source

  • kalkulat@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    You -do- realize you’re getting advice from a machine that constructs sentences using mathematical algorithms, and has no clue at all what it’s saying … right?

    source

    • Bonson@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Yes I’m aware, I have a degree in the field. Nothing in my sentence would indicate that I don’t understand. I’m agreeing that it’s statistically biased towards the speaker, therefore, you can work to lazily normalize the result by investing the input.

      source