this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2025
667 points (98.5% liked)

Technology

331 readers
106 users here now

Share interesting Technology news and links.

Rules:

  1. No paywalled sites at all.
  2. News articles has to be recent, not older than 2 weeks (14 days).
  3. No videos.
  4. Post only direct links.

To encourage more original sources and keep this space commercial free as much as I could, the following websites are Blacklisted:

More sites will be added to the blacklist as needed.

Encouraged:

founded 2 months ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] moosetwin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (19 children)

(Just to make sure we're on the same page, the first article describes deception as 'the systematic inducement of false beliefs in the pursuit of some outcome other than the truth'.)

Are you saying that AI bots do not do this behavior? Why is that?

(P.S. I am not saying this story is necessarily real, I am just want to know your reasoning)

[–] Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world 24 points 2 weeks ago (15 children)

No, because LLMs do not have agency and can't "pursue" anything, nor do they have any ability to evaluate truth. They reproduce patterns that have been presented to them through training data.

[–] WraithGear@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (12 children)

i think this is a symantics issue. yes using ‘lie’ is a bit of short hand/personifying a process. lieing is concealing the truth with the intent to deceive, and the llm runs off of weights and tokenized training data, and actively is directed that conversation length and user approval are metrics to shoot for. Applying falsehoods are the most efficient way to do that.

the llm does not share the goals of the user and the user must account for this

but like calling it a lie is the most efficient means to get the point across.

[–] ech@lemmy.ca 12 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

but like calling it a lie is the most efficient means to get the point across.

It very much doesn't because it enforces the idea that these algorithms know anything a or plan for anything. It is entirely inefficient to treat an llm like a person, as the clown in the screenshots demonstrated.

[–] Lightor@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago

Some people really can't debate a topic without constantly insulting the person they disagree with...

[–] WraithGear@lemmy.world -3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

it depends on the topic really. it is a lie in that it is a told false hood. by reasonable people talking about the unreliability of LLM’s it is sufficient without dragging the conversation away from the topic. if the conversation starts to surround the ‘feelings’ of the ‘AI’ then it’s maybe helpful point it out. otherwise it’s needlessly combative and distracting

[–] ech@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

No, it doesn't. Would you say a calculator "lied" to you if it output an incorrect answer? Is your watch "lying" to you when it's out of sync? No, obviously not. They're just wrong, not "telling falsehoods".

[–] WraithGear@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

yes if the calculator incorrectly provided an answer, and i was having a casual conversation over it.

such as with over simplified rounding and truncation errors that some calculators give.

[–] ech@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What is casual about the situation in the screenshots? You keep bringing that up as if it changes anything.

[–] WraithGear@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

by that logic, what does arguing about the semantics of a word choice where the initial idea by the post was obviously understood, else we would not be talking about it?

seems off topic like i warned about, and a waste of time

[–] ech@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I explained why the word matters in my very first comment, and several since. You're the one that started the argument on semantics, so you tell me.

[–] WraithGear@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago

the fact we are still arguing is why. and now i am leaving there is nothing else to be said.

[–] Lightor@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

A lie is defined as an intentionally false statement. LLMs can be given instruction sets that lead to them providing intentionally false information. This would be the LLM telling a falsehood because it was instructed to do so. They can lie, it has been documented and studied. You're arguing against something that's already been figured out, what are you doing?

You speak with such confidence and insult others but you don't seem open to others opinions at all, or even 10 seconds of googling.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)