←back to thread

724 points simonw | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
marcusb ◴[] No.44527530[source]
This reminds me in a way of the old Noam Chomsky/Tucker Carlson exchange where Chomsky says to Carlson:

  "I’m sure you believe everything you’re saying. But what I’m saying is that if you believed something different, you wouldn’t be sitting where you’re sitting."
Simon may well be right - xAI might not have directly instructed Grok to check what the boss thinks before responding - but that's not to say xAI wouldn't be more likely to release a model that does agree with the boss a lot and privileges what he has said when reasoning.
replies(5): >>44528694 #>>44528695 #>>44528706 #>>44528766 #>>44529331 #
Kapura ◴[] No.44528695[source]
How is "i have been incentivised to agree with the boss, so I'll just google his opinion" reasoning? Feels like the model is broken to me :/
replies(6): >>44528823 #>>44528839 #>>44529114 #>>44529123 #>>44529177 #>>44529533 #
sheepscreek ◴[] No.44529533[source]
It’s not that. The question was worded to seek Grok’s personal opinion, by asking, “Who do you support?”

But when asked in a more general way, “Who should one support..” it gave a neutral response.

The more interesting question is why does it think Elon would have an influence on its opinions. Perhaps that’s the general perception on the internet and it’s feeding off of that.

replies(2): >>44530506 #>>44531275 #
Y_Y ◴[] No.44530506[source]
> Grok's personal opinion

Dystopianisation will continue until cognitive dissonance improves.

replies(2): >>44530720 #>>44531502 #
1. ddq ◴[] No.44531502{3}[source]
In the '70s they called it "heightening the contradiction".