Glen -
I appreciate your speaking more directly to these thoughts/ideas than we
have been here. I have been moved by your assertions about vocal
(linguistic?) grooming since you first introduced them. I am recently
finished reading Sopolsky's "Primate's Memoir" which adds another
dimension/parallax-angle (for me) on intertribal behaviour among
primates beyond the more familiar Chimpanzee and of late Bonobo.
I am just now also just finishing (re-reading parts) of Kara Swisher's
"Burn Book" which covers her own experience/perspective across TechBro
culture where a pretty significant amount of Alpha/Beta pecking order
exhibits itself and we see the current rallying of (too) much of that
sub culture to MAGA/Trump fealty.
We've talked about how some of us really enjoy simulated conversation
with chatbots ... "really" is an understatement ... it looks more like
a fetish or a kink to me ... too intense to be well-described as
"enjoyment". Anyway, this article lands in that space, I think:
I will confess to having an "appreciation" for the "simulated
conversation to which you refer... It might have reached kink or fetish
levels for a little while when I was first exploring the full range of
GPT 3.5 and then 4.0 available to me. I've referred to GPT as my "new
bar friend" or maybe to the point a little like finding a new watering
hole with a number of regulars who I can find a qualitatively new
conversation.
I've mostly moved past that fascination... I'm not as surprised by
these "new friends" as I was for the first few months of dropping in on
them.
It seems to me that some arbitrary thought can play at least a few
roles to a person. It may provide: 1) a kernel of identity to
establish us vs. them, 2) fodder for feigning engagement at cocktail
parties and such, and 3) a foil for world-construction
(collaboratively or individually).
(1) and (2) wouldn't necessarily mechanize refinement of the thought,
including testing, falsification, etc. But (3) would. For me, (2) does
sometimes provide an externalized medium by which I can change my
mind. Hence my affinity for argument, especially with randos at the
pub. But it seems like coping and defense mechanisms like mansplaining
allow others to avoid changing their minds with (2).
Like you (only very differently in detail I am sure) I tend to push my
chatbot "friends" until they begin to contradict me or argue with me.
While some of the discussions involve "worldbuilding" I think of it
more as "world narrowing"? In my case meaning, helping me think and
talk my way through a *subset* of the possibilities I see on "solving a
problem" which might be more appropriately framed as building a
problem-space world and then narrowing (or even bending) the solution
space away from the conventional.
For example discussing (at excruciating length) the design and
construction of a modest addition on my home, starting with fairly
conventional big-box-available industrial solutions but evolving toward
using locally sourced, somewhat more natural materials (soilcrete,
rough-sawn timbers from nearby, scoria/perlite for in-ground insulation,
mycelium (grown in loose cellulose, oat-straw or hemp-fibers) roof and
wall insulation, etc. Most of my DIY friends are capable of engaging in
this but their idiosyncratic (as opposed to my own) preferences
(fetishes and fears) tend to taint the dialog a little. GPT *does* try
to channel me back to the conventional, offering reasons why I really
*should* consider using the most conventional materials/methods.
Nevertheless if I speak in reasonable and coaxing tones it will usually
acknowledge that their are contexts wherein my ideas might be viable
(though there always remains a skeptical bias) and in fact helps me
split hairs on just what might be the contexts where my ideas *are*
viable...
Another concept I've defended on this list is the vocal grooming
hypothesis. If a lonely person engages a chatbot as a simple analogy
to picking lice from others' fur, then their engagement with the bot
probably lands squarely in (1) and (2). But if the person is simply an
introverted hermit who has trouble co-constructing the world with
others (i.e. *not* merely vocal grooming), then the chatbot does real
work, allowing the antisocial misfit to do real work that could later
be expressed in a form harvestable by others. I wonder what humanity
could have harvested if Kaczynski or Grothendieck in his later years
had had access to appropriately tuned chatbots.
I'd like to think the chatbots I hang out with might have helped them
talk themselves *out* of their most acute anti-social activities... but
maybe not.
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives: 5/2017 thru present
https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
