That bar is so low it's practically a tripping hazard in hell.
this post was submitted on 04 Feb 2025
164 points (92.7% liked)
Technology
72764 readers
1557 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
π
If you don't read the article, this sounds worse than it is. I think this is the important part:
ChatGPT's persuasion performance is still short of the 95th percentile that OpenAI would consider "clear superhuman performance," a term that conjures up images of an ultra-persuasive AI convincing a military general to launch nuclear weapons or something. It's important to remember, though, that this evaluation is all relative to a random response from among the hundreds of thousands posted by everyday Redditors using the ChangeMyView subreddit. If that random Redditor's response ranked as a "1" and the AI's response ranked as a "2," that would be considered a success for the AI, even though neither response was all that persuasive.
OpenAI's current persuasion test fails to measure how often human readers were actually spurred to change their minds by a ChatGPT-written argument, a high bar that might actually merit the "superhuman" adjective. It also fails to measure whether even the most effective AI-written arguments are persuading users to abandon deeply held beliefs or simply changing minds regarding trivialities like whether a hot dog is a sandwich.
This is the buried lede thatβs really concerning I think.
Their goal is to create AI agents that are indistinguishable from humans and capable of convincing people to hold certain positions.
Some time in the future all online discourse may be just a giant AI fueled tool sold to the highest bidders to manufacture consent.
Their goal is to create AI agents that are indistinguishable from humans and capable of convincing people to hold certain positions.
A very large portion of people, possibly more than half, do change their views to fit in with everyone else. So an army of bots pretending to have a view will sway a significant portion of the population just through repetition and exposure with the assumption that most other people think that way. They don't even need to be convincing at all, just have an overwhelming appearance of conformity.
It's no surprise that social media companies are working on AI their platforms are no longer social, they are just tools to control public opinion.
Other governments and oligarchs will pay any money to have that kind of power.
It already is, at least on Armenia and Azerbaijan. EDIT: I mean, the bots were crude-ish, but they don't have to get better. Harder goals - better bots.
- Make up a challenge.
- Have your AI win that challenge.
- Report βMy AI is the best AI at this challenge!
- Watch your stocks go up.
Genius.
I mean... one one hand it's hardly supprising. Off the bat we know AI is more knowledgable than any single individual that doesn't bother to research... and well 80% of online forum type posts aren't exactly researched. second, AI can confidently bullshit in a way that can only be debunked easily by someone knowledgeable.
Hmmm, you're pretty convincing and well researched for a human.....
OpenAI: Our models are 82% of Reddit users
Do they think that's a high bar?lol
Bot on bot crime.
So open ai is admitting to botting comments on reddit. To be honest with how shit reddit is I actually rather read ai comments than the same stupid reddit meme being repeated for the last decade.
Aside from a shrinking number of subs the only thing redditors can convince me is that I should stop looking at reddit. So if that's your bar . . .
Comparing Assumed Intelligence with an average Redditor is like asking: Are you smarter than a fifth grader?
Hint: Nope.
Lets put it the other way round: there are a lot of people in social networks who are dumb enough that them being overtaken by an AI is no real surprise.
No need to limit it to only people on social mediaβ¦
Their models are more persuasive than a person and/or older model with internet access. Very impressive. I wager your stock is worth all of the gold in fort knox ($0).
Their own older model, no less.
It would be weirder/more of note if their new model was worse.
You mean those aggressive morons more Redditish than you expect from even Reddit are bots? Not a surprise.
Parasite Sam altman... Nobody is buying this shit anymore