No Stupid, AI Chatbots Can’t Lie

Free AI web copilot to create summaries, insights and extended knowledge, download it at here

1755

Abstract

g-definition/">paper from Stanford’s Philosophy Encyclopedia.</a> Arguably a more credible source than Bloomberg.A definition is as good of a place to start as any.<blockquote id="22d6">To lie is to make a believed-false statement to another person with the intention that the other person believe that statement to be true.</blockquote>What Mr. Stanford also says is that there are at least four necessary conditions for lying based on this definition:<ul><li>lying requires that a person make a statement (statement condition)</li><li>lying requires that the person believe the statement to be false; that is, lying requires that the statement be untruthful (untruthfulness condition)</li><li>lying requires that the untruthful statement be made to another person (addressee condition)</li><li>Fourth, lying requires that the person intends that the other person believe the untruthful statement to be true (intention to deceive the addressee condition).</li></ul>The first condition passed with flying colours by our future silicone and child labour-based overlords. AI chatbots do make statements. And what statements!And we’re done. If you thought this would take long, it won’t. Our analysis stops at the second condition, on the word believe. I intentionally left out “person”. As hard as you may believe your AI girlfriend to be a real person, it’s not. But that is a topic for another day.AI does not believe. AI believes the best basketball player was Shaq as much as it believes 2+2 equals 4 or that Vin Diesel is 56. There are no opinions involved, just a bunch of convoluted code which distilled ends up in the same place “if something

Options

then x; else y”.I won’t go into the other two conditions as I already made my point. Unless this article is used against me in the court of AI in 5 years for hate speech against computer-based lifeforms, I’ll stand by my point that AI chat-bots will always be just complex algorithms that scramble to patch together similar pieces of information in the hopes they resemble a 14-year-olds Wikipedia inspired history homework to get a few hundred million in funding for a Venture Capital or questionable government.What AI is though is just the next click-inducing self-perpetual storm that plagues so-called news organisations that are shifting from actual news to glorified content farms. See NFTs, Crypto and Twitter among others. I went into details here, talking about another social trend that was everywhere and nowhere a month later “<a href="https://readmedium.com/millennials-are-killing-work-the-artificial-origin-of-quiet-quitting-56ddcfdf8296">Millennials are now killing work? The artificial origin of “quiet quitting</a>”.I urge you to take everything AI-related with a pint of salt. It’s as much of a revolution as Musk’s boring tunnel is a revolution over London’s Underground. So try and use all these tricks you find online to make a couple of months in rent before it suffers the same fate as the NFTs.If you are not part of Medium Premium and would like to read more than five quality articles a day, subscribe to using the link below. It will not only support me but my fellow writers as well. If you are already subscribed why did you read this?https://medium.com/@george_atkins/membership</article></body>

But they can make (some) people filthy rich

AI is on track to revolutionise content corporate profits by watering down quality in favour of unmatched quantity. If you can also stick it to those responsible for the huge chunk of your expenses, soon-to-be-called “pre-AI employees”, the better.

God forbid they will end up like those poor Hollywood executives who fell victim to the writers' and actors' union strike.

Taking a page out of the copyright-tainted AI book, I’ll completely miss the obvious issue of AI content feeding on AI content which renders any output as useless as a US Government hearing on technology and go straight into another issue. A glorified algorithm can’t lie.

In my hubris, I’ll allow myself to challenge the great minds of the BBC, The New York Times and Bloomberg. An obviously impossible task as God knows they’ve never been wrong but does not hurt to try.

I’ll make my case using a 2008 (revised in 2015) paper from Stanford’s Philosophy Encyclopedia. Arguably a more credible source than Bloomberg.

A definition is as good of a place to start as any.

To lie is to make a believed-false statement to another person with the intention that the other person believe that statement to be true.

What Mr. Stanford also says is that there are at least four necessary conditions for lying based on this definition:

lying requires that a person make a statement (statement condition)

lying requires that the person believe the statement to be false; that is, lying requires that the statement be untruthful (untruthfulness condition)

lying requires that the untruthful statement be made to another person (addressee condition)

Fourth, lying requires that the person intends that the other person believe the untruthful statement to be true (intention to deceive the addressee condition).

The first condition passed with flying colours by our future silicone and child labour-based overlords. AI chatbots do make statements. And what statements!

And we’re done. If you thought this would take long, it won’t. Our analysis stops at the second condition, on the word believe. I intentionally left out “person”. As hard as you may believe your AI girlfriend to be a real person, it’s not. But that is a topic for another day.

AI does not believe. AI believes the best basketball player was Shaq as much as it believes 2+2 equals 4 or that Vin Diesel is 56. There are no opinions involved, just a bunch of convoluted code which distilled ends up in the same place “if something then x; else y”.

I won’t go into the other two conditions as I already made my point. Unless this article is used against me in the court of AI in 5 years for hate speech against computer-based lifeforms, I’ll stand by my point that AI chat-bots will always be just complex algorithms that scramble to patch together similar pieces of information in the hopes they resemble a 14-year-olds Wikipedia inspired history homework to get a few hundred million in funding for a Venture Capital or questionable government.

What AI is though is just the next click-inducing self-perpetual storm that plagues so-called news organisations that are shifting from actual news to glorified content farms. See NFTs, Crypto and Twitter among others. I went into details here, talking about another social trend that was everywhere and nowhere a month later “Millennials are now killing work? The artificial origin of “quiet quitting”.

I urge you to take everything AI-related with a pint of salt. It’s as much of a revolution as Musk’s boring tunnel is a revolution over London’s Underground. So try and use all these tricks you find online to make a couple of months in rent before it suffers the same fate as the NFTs.

If you are not part of Medium Premium and would like to read more than five quality articles a day, subscribe to using the link below. It will not only support me but my fellow writers as well. If you are already subscribed why did you read this?

https://medium.com/@george_atkins/membership