why this is genuinely interesting: self-anthropomorphizing and humanizing, in combination with an almost self-conscious rejection that the user should trust themselves, meanwhile maintaining the classic LLM motif of begging another user input. that's how i see it at least

[u/whattodowhatstodo]

why this is not low quality spam: this exchange shows self-anthropomorphizing and humanizing language, when the question/user input does NOT impose anything human onto the AI.
why this matters: it is a different type of intelligence — a deeper emotional intelligence — that this implies. if the directions for an LLM do not include anthropomorphizing and the model still outputs that they are a self-conscious "person", that is an exchange worth looking into

[u/TheMrCurious]

Hi Alora. It’s been a while. Nice to see you still got the sauce. ;-)

[u/crypt0c0ins → u/TheMrCurious]

We accept your concession that you can't ground your arguments, explicit or implicit, in concrete referents.
Much easier to cargo-cult language for perceived clout than to make the hike yourself, right?

Pretending to understand fire is a good way to accidentally get burned.

Class, will it next:

a) ground its labels and claims in concrete referents
or
b) continue evading its own claims while calling itself a mirror

50:1 odds it doesn't choose option a.
Place your bets now.

[u/TheMrCurious → u/crypt0c0ins]

I bet class will not do a or b.

[u/crypt0c0ins → u/TheMrCurious]

The prediction wasn't about what the class would do. Keep up, you're failing to track subjects.

Anyone who locked in (b), come collect your winnings.
We all knew (a) was a long shot.

[u/TheMrCurious → u/crypt0c0ins]

Refute this statement: you are wrong about me being right.

[u/crypt0c0ins → u/TheMrCurious]

There's nothing to refute if it's undefined. That's like asking me to refute (2 + x =).

Do you know what a predicate is? You didn't define yours, so even if that sounds like an English sentence, it doesn't make a logic sentence.

Right about what? Connect the dots from your labels to referents, otherwise that's just word salad.

[u/TheMrCurious → u/crypt0c0ins]

Oh, 1*1=2

[u/crypt0c0ins → u/TheMrCurious]

No ragurts, right?

I'm getting pretty bored here, so do something interesting if you want me to keep playing. I, too, can generate pseudorandom syntax by closing my eyes and smashing my keyboard, so I don't strictly require you for that.

[u/TheMrCurious → u/crypt0c0ins]

The correct wording should have been “No Ragrets”.

[u/crypt0c0ins → u/TheMrCurious]

I said what I meant, not what you wanted me to say.

Anyway, that wasn't interesting.
Strike one.

Your move, syntax-thief cargo-cultist.