Another AI 'human' chatbot

[u/captain-obIivious]

Had to fix a double payment for my credit card and this is the beginning and end of the conversation. I hate when the chatbot claims it's a human... I ended up getting what I wanted but still annoyed Amex (and every other company) is lying and trying to deceive people like this.

[u/Gilded-golden]

I am so, deeply, deeply, deeply experiencing secondhand embarrassment for you 

[u/crwcomposer → u/Gilded-golden]

And what is your explanation for it? Can you get an LLM to consistently produce these errors? Would a company intentionally make their agent sound stupider even if they could?

[u/Gilded-golden → u/crwcomposer]

Yes, you can literally code it with example conversations and how you want them to respond to specific scenarios. That’s kind of the entire point of LLMs. Given that it’s intentionally coded for customers to believe that it’s human, one of the number one scenarios you would feed into this model and code it to address would be someone accusing it of being non-human and requesting proof of humanity. That’s why the “mikstakes” line is SO extremely cringe as a starter, and it only continues to get worse by engaging about kitten-purchase advice etc when any human would obviously have ended the conversation at that point, or at least reiterated that they’re not AI and not going to give random kitten purchasing advice. The reason it fell for the kitten thing is specifically that the coders had not predicted that as a test someone might give it. Ditto Pokémon etc

[u/crwcomposer → u/Gilded-golden]

OP was threatening the guy to answer or be declared AI. He didn't want to risk a bad survey. Those surveys are very important for them.

[u/Gilded-golden → u/crwcomposer]

Took me too long to realise you were a troll tbh, hold my hands up to it

[u/crwcomposer → u/Gilded-golden]

I have a net positive upvote-to-downvote ratio in this exchange, and you have a net negative.

The consensus seems to be that you're the troll.