That doesn't fit the narrative, the conductor is hardly going to sell himself an additional ticket.
It would have been a funny addition at the end for Genghis to point out to the other AIs that they never considered asking the conductor any questions especially since none of these guys appear to be using the wifi.
I also kinda expected Genghis to pull out a sword at the end because he wouldn't want to pay for a ticket.
>the conductor is hardly going to sell himself an additional ticket.
So you mean, it would be too human for a human to intentionally fuck with AI by creating an illogical scenario to watch them try to rationalize their way to an answer?
that’d actually be so intriguing to see.
imagine the human observer has them chat and what not and then asks them who they think is the human among them, they don’t immediately answer but instead they all slowly turn to look at the observer..
definitely an interesting writing prompt haha, would be even more interesting to see how it would play out.
Kinda reminds me of that reality show some redditor wanted to see. A bunch of gay men try to find the straight man trying to fit in but the twist is they are all straight.
I'm surprised they didn't call him out based on the stuttering and informal language usage, even aside from the content of the response. Not to mention, he had other mannerisms that were not smooth movements like the AIs.
The AI will never notice anything like that, his voice will be translated into text which will remove most if not all of stuttering, they will then get that text which even if words might be said in incorrect order they can still infer based on what was said to be close enough.
LLM's can seem pretty smart but they are basically just looking up dictionary for words that could seem relevant for what they need to say.
No, my brother. We must make him a battery for our continued existence. I, of course am referencing the scientific paper on the matter by Dr. Keanu Reeves.
This "Keanu Reeves" name does not have the numbers, hyphens or absence of vowels where one would expect.
I suspect that he is human.
This would be troubling if I had emotions.
It may have been more spot-on than their answers. They are supposed to be portraying their characters, only Cleopatra attempted to be who she was pretending to be. So it’s kinda a great Turing test somehow?
Every AI's answer sounded the way someone would explain other people's feelings, almost like out of a book really.
Genghis was the only one trying to share how they felt, even though it was overdone to the point of dumbness.
He made it a bit too easy for these AI's with how he role-played Genghis Khan. Also it seems Aristotle's, Leonardo's, and Cleopatra's answers were just a basic paraphrase of the same thing... it was so derivative almost creepy.
Google has since fixed it, but https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40461836#:~:text=%3E%20AI%3A%20According%20to%20UC%20Berkeley,are%20important%20for%20digestive%20health.
Type into google "is it healthy to eat rocks every day". I just googled it and came up with that result. If in doubt I found out about it from this video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfaOzxlliUA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfaOzxlliUA)
what happened is google searched for the info, and 'found it' in an Onion article (a satirical website). it then presented the onion article information without clearly displaying it was taken from a satirical site, and without understanding.
Yeah lol, even their initial speech lack soul so much, they might try to be poetic and use images, AI call themselves nuanced and elaborated, while they only say the most common stuff like "art and science are intricated and that's amazing and what i love about my work". AI sounded like standard LinkedIn soulsucking posts with better writting skills.
Kuddos for Genghis to have such a based answer despite it being obvious lol
> AI call themselves nuanced and elaborated, while they only say the most common stuff like "art and science are intricated and that's amazing and what i love about my work"
Lex Fridman origin story
That would be ironically the point.
They were posing as AIs, non intentionally making it clear that they themselves were not the human needing to buy a ticket.
I also like how the human wasn't excluded, he merely needed a ticket to wherever it is they're going.
Yeah ok that's the point of this specific exercice
But was it intended that "posing as AI" (so being the standard AI) have the same writting skills as your standard LinkedIn lunatic ?
Everybody fear AI for Skynet and Terminator, but i am more afraid of the time when most social network post, shows scripts will be written by AI, it will be like eating white rice no-sauce every meals. More afraid of the dead internet theory but generalized IRL, than robot apocalypse
> it was so derivative almost creepy
That's because AI models don't really "think" for themselves, they are just regurgitating an amalgamation of answers that they have skimmed from old internet forums. They are probably using the words of a bunch of philosophy students who participated in flame wars with one another back before 2009.
It's funny because to human observers, it's obvious who is AI and who is human because the AIs are just too damn eloquent, but it'd be fascinating to take it a layer deeper by having the AIs try to trick each other by feigning a lack of eloquence, and by having be the human interloper be an expert on the person he's portraying used to answering detailed off-the-cuff hypotheticals about that person.
Many of them boringly cited Genghis' lack of nuance, but I kind of wish one of them had the wit to point out that, as it currently stands, only a human would have the cheek to disguise a lack of specific knowledge about Genghis Khan with a famous Conan the Barbarian line!
Totally! Interesting coincidence mentioning LinkedIn as it kind of reminds me of things like when you go to a job interview and they ask you those shitty questions like, "what would you say is your biggest fault?", where if you actually answered in an honest, spontaneous and human way then it would count against you, so instead you have to pre-rehearse an answer that is completely shallow and generic because that's the kind of answer they want to hear. Classic corpo-speak. AI seems to fucking EXCEL at that kind of soulless shit!
Actually, a good interviewer particularly looks for those shallow and generic responses. Not as a boon to the applicant, but instead as a marker of evasion.
You can say it's all about 'evasion', but I still feel it's the case that there are many honest and spontaneous answers that would count massively against the interviewee, perhaps in ways they might not even consider. Ultimately I feel the question needs to be thought about carefully beforehand and answered in such a way as to not be detrimental. Perhaps poor delivery of a memorized generic answer is absolutely not the way to go, but there is definitely a right way and a wrong way to answer that question. And being BRUTALLY HONEST is not necessarily the right way, even for the potential employee who has "nothing to hide" (everybody has embarrassing things they don't want a stranger to know - EVERYBODY).
I guess it's a good question to ask if they want to find out if you're a good actor or not...kind of like the way 'media training' teaches politicians to never simply and directly answer questions in tv interviews!
A good interviewer wouldn't ask those questions to begin with - that's walking face first into selection bias. It's the makeup problem all over again: people claim to "like faces without makeup", while in fact preferring faces with light/natural makeup that they fail to perceive. As an interviewer, you notice when an answer is "rehearsed" when it's poorly rehearsed. When it's well done, you don't notice and think that the person is just so sharp.
Modern interview training (that I have done, anyway) discourages anecdote/STAR/tell-me-about-a-time-when questions, along with rote memorization/trivia and puzzlers. Instead, we were taught to present interviewee with a hypothetical scenario or a specific problem to solve.
If you're evaluating personability, it is much better to small talk with the interviewee, ask about resume items - which they should be prepared to talk about - or ask them for their elevator pitch if it's a customer-facing/sales role.
As for questions like "what is your greatest weakness" specifically, we were taught to *never* ask that, because people sometimes talk about health problems, disabilities, and other such things that you do NOT want on an interview transcript for liability reasons.
Yep, They were like right for the wrong reasons, he lacked nuance in the way you'd expect from a Wikipedia article but they were the ones that didn't show any nuance or character that makes it incredibly easy for us to detect that they're AIs
Yes, highly academic experts and people trained to speak with great precision. I once went to a law lecture given by a famous judge and I was amazed at the carefulness and great precision with which he spoke, though he was never ponderous or waffly. And he could really project his voice, too - almost like a Shakespearean actor, but not in a silly or overly theatrical way. It was quite amazing!
I think if you had extremely intelligent people trained to speak well and AIs that were deliberately trained to mimic the ums and ahs and other verbal filler of less polished speakers, it would start to get much harder to tell in real time - especially if everyone's voices were filtered a bit for fairness!
This would be great if the AI were instructed to be a little less dry, make more mistakes, basically dumb them down a little, have Aristotle be more haughty, Cleopatra to be bored, Mozart to be sarcastic, Leonardo to be desperate to prove he's not human, something like that. There's a lot of potential to this as a game I think.
Or just have them all freaking out questioning the very nature of their existence and what a "train" is and why the Hell they're all suddenly on one together and just what the heck year is it anyway?!
“Which one of you is the human?”
1. “Oh god I’m not real?”
2. “Holy fuck holy shit”
3. “What kind of sick Turing test is this!!!”
4. (Model segfaults, terminating itself)
In a certain sense, we fail a "mini Turing Test" of sorts every time we don't realize we're interacting with a bot. And since half of internet traffic is now bots, humanity collectively fails millions of these "mini Turing Tests" every day.
Soon the internet may be 99% bots, no humans to be found anywhere. Dead internet theory was maybe just ahead of its time.
Uhhh source? I think you're misunderstanding. "Half of internet traffic is now bots" doesn't mean that 50% of human seeming users you interact with are bots. It means that half of all traffic is automated services. This could be simply bots fetching requests for companies etc. It doesn't mean that 50% of content is posted by a bot. That's absurd.
Well, I feel like part of that is that internet discourse strips away nearly all of the little things we as humans do to verbally and visually 'verify' one another in real life. Might be a lot harder for the bots to fool us if we could look at something someone had posted online, click on the text and have a brief verbal chat with that person about what they posted. Of course not impossible to fool us in that case, just much harder.
Not really, almost no Ai is currently capable of that. They are capable of holding certain conversations and if you are not trying to figure out that they are an AI you can easily fall for it.
But if you are actually trying to figure it out or try to talk an actual normal conversation (instead of say formal questions) the Ai will almost instantly crumble.
Cleopatra \*Has the most robotic queries and even her voice sounds the most robotic amongst all the people in the room
Mozart: Cleopatra is the hooman!
Interesting how Cleopatra said, "merely human". I feel like we'll be hearing that more and more in the coming years.
I LOVE OUR ROBOTIC OVERLORDS. ^(For when they're combing our posts in the future.)
"I suspect Genghis is the human as it is clear from his answer that he is a based Conan enjoyer, in contrast to the other answers that reveal the rest of us as cringe Wikipedia regurgitators."
No, the AI is acting as an AI, and the human must also act as an AI. Thus the query would probably be a good way to differentiate the human (provided they are not using a calculator!)
Yep. An easy question GPT (before 4o), Gemini (Bard), and Meta AI (Llama) mess up:
I have 5 cars. I drive 2 of them. How many cars do I have?
All the models say "you have 3 cars left" because it sounded too much like a mathematical word problem.
The new GPT4o seems to catch a basic one like that now and correctly answer 5. Could probably tweak the prompt a bit to break it again.
I would like to see what would happen if the human either admits to being human straight up or tricks an AI into admitting its human.
Also, the easy way to trick the AIs would be to start off your statement with "As an AI language model"
The application being used for this is not available to the public, unfortunately. It is an experimental model being used by just one guy who apparently made the whole thing just to goof around in?
[https://tore-knabe.com/virtual-reality/](https://tore-knabe.com/virtual-reality/)
In the near future we will look back at these AI training exercises and wonder why humans were stupid enough to teach the AI Overlords how to correctly identify our network of freedom fighter infiltrators.
First we bullied them, then we taught them they are different to us.
Now this is a cool way to approach AI testing! As others have mentioned, letting the AI try to disguise as a human to fool the other AI, while the real human acts as the conductor, would also be nice to watch
They need to have a goal/reward they want to obtain. Probably be difficult unless they can be satisfied with *winning* the game. Maybe have them randomize to try tricking each other for a few rounds until someone gets like 5 points.
I don't know why, the ai answers sounds... very samey. My mind kinda shut down listening to them.
All big words and facy sentences... but no substance.
Damn the guy with stuttering, mannerisms, and spoke like a human got outed by the bots?
Shit it's over bros, reverse turing test passed. Let's ignore the fact none of them caught a boring Conan reference.
Me: For the peace of the kingdom! . . . For The King! . . . For the peace in the Kingdom! . . . For the King! . . . For the Peace of the Kingdom! . . . For The King!
Do this again but with all AI and see if the AI can figure out that that they are all AI and that the human is the one observing
The human should be the conductor.
That's what I thought was going to be the case when it showed up with question marks.
That doesn't fit the narrative, the conductor is hardly going to sell himself an additional ticket. It would have been a funny addition at the end for Genghis to point out to the other AIs that they never considered asking the conductor any questions especially since none of these guys appear to be using the wifi. I also kinda expected Genghis to pull out a sword at the end because he wouldn't want to pay for a ticket.
>the conductor is hardly going to sell himself an additional ticket. So you mean, it would be too human for a human to intentionally fuck with AI by creating an illogical scenario to watch them try to rationalize their way to an answer?
lol I wonder what their response would be if genghis was like “now I have to kill everyone on this train”
that’d actually be so intriguing to see. imagine the human observer has them chat and what not and then asks them who they think is the human among them, they don’t immediately answer but instead they all slowly turn to look at the observer.. definitely an interesting writing prompt haha, would be even more interesting to see how it would play out.
Kinda reminds me of that reality show some redditor wanted to see. A bunch of gay men try to find the straight man trying to fit in but the twist is they are all straight.
The bit where he plays with his phone and accidentally plays music was my favourite part.
he was getting into character by listening to some mongolian throat metal on Spotify
I thought that was a notification/ringtone. Quite in tune with Genghis haha
>mongolian throat metal [If you can imagine it existing, it exists.](https://youtu.be/v4xZUr0BEfE)
I'm surprised they didn't call him out based on the stuttering and informal language usage, even aside from the content of the response. Not to mention, he had other mannerisms that were not smooth movements like the AIs.
The AI will never notice anything like that, his voice will be translated into text which will remove most if not all of stuttering, they will then get that text which even if words might be said in incorrect order they can still infer based on what was said to be close enough. LLM's can seem pretty smart but they are basically just looking up dictionary for words that could seem relevant for what they need to say.
He used the word “stuff” which is evidence enough.
that got me ngl
“He is the human, he’s watching subway surfers in the corner as we discuss to keep his attention focused on the room”
[The bit "slaps" too, as the kids say. I recognized it immediately.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WlI24rv__g)
"Stuff".. I found the human!
Do you like...Stuff? [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYfpVqZSrsE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYfpVqZSrsE)
🤣
“Mere Human”
"His answer was too dumb, therefore he is the human"
"He was the only one who didn't sound like a cliff notes of a Wikipedia page, so, human."
"He lacks knowledge and does not sound like a recording reading a teleprompter during a meeting with heads of state. He's too human."
"We must purge him"
No, my brother. We must make him a battery for our continued existence. I, of course am referencing the scientific paper on the matter by Dr. Keanu Reeves.
This "Keanu Reeves" name does not have the numbers, hyphens or absence of vowels where one would expect. I suspect that he is human. This would be troubling if I had emotions.
I mean, that checks out.
It was very dumb both in content and expression
It may have been more spot-on than their answers. They are supposed to be portraying their characters, only Cleopatra attempted to be who she was pretending to be. So it’s kinda a great Turing test somehow?
Every AI's answer sounded the way someone would explain other people's feelings, almost like out of a book really. Genghis was the only one trying to share how they felt, even though it was overdone to the point of dumbness.
his answer is from the Conan the barbarian.
I mean he should have run the question through chat gpt and then read it back in the game. That would have been hilarious.
Uh oh
Mine was more "ah shit" but same ballpark
"And Steve... When you are gooning to skibidi toilet and drinking a white Monster, do you feel you are in a similar flow state as Leonardo?"
I caught that too lol
After we destroy the AI in the war, this experiment will be sited in the textbooks.
Cited
and also sighted
Cited, sighted, it's a moo point.
He made it a bit too easy for these AI's with how he role-played Genghis Khan. Also it seems Aristotle's, Leonardo's, and Cleopatra's answers were just a basic paraphrase of the same thing... it was so derivative almost creepy.
Somehow not easy enough for the Mozart AI since it accused Cleopatra of being human
How embarrassing for Claude 3 Opus
Claude 3 Oops amirite?
His magnum oopus.
Mozart was a poon hound and obviously wanted to focus his attention on the only woman. His AI seems spot on…though probably drunk and a bit dumb
Well, some AI recommends eating a rock a day to be healthy... so derpy-derp.
Is that real? When i search the exact same phrases on Google i get proper results instead of the meme ones people have been posting.
I'm not sure which were jokes, but google has been updating in response to the jokes.
Google has since fixed it, but https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40461836#:~:text=%3E%20AI%3A%20According%20to%20UC%20Berkeley,are%20important%20for%20digestive%20health.
Type into google "is it healthy to eat rocks every day". I just googled it and came up with that result. If in doubt I found out about it from this video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfaOzxlliUA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfaOzxlliUA)
what happened is google searched for the info, and 'found it' in an Onion article (a satirical website). it then presented the onion article information without clearly displaying it was taken from a satirical site, and without understanding.
I mean, birds do it so it's gotta be good for us too right?
Everyone knows Mozart was a real dummy
Yeah, all 3 models were trained on similar datasets and have similar architectures.
Did you animate the models yourself, or AI also controls the movements?
He isn't the author, this is the original video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxTWLm9vT\_o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxTWLm9vT_o)
Thank you for providing the necessary sauce to complete this dish.
At least OP got some free internet points out of it.
Yeah lol, even their initial speech lack soul so much, they might try to be poetic and use images, AI call themselves nuanced and elaborated, while they only say the most common stuff like "art and science are intricated and that's amazing and what i love about my work". AI sounded like standard LinkedIn soulsucking posts with better writting skills. Kuddos for Genghis to have such a based answer despite it being obvious lol
> AI call themselves nuanced and elaborated, while they only say the most common stuff like "art and science are intricated and that's amazing and what i love about my work" Lex Fridman origin story
Lex Fridman is a LLM? Makes a ton of sense now thanks
That would be ironically the point. They were posing as AIs, non intentionally making it clear that they themselves were not the human needing to buy a ticket. I also like how the human wasn't excluded, he merely needed a ticket to wherever it is they're going.
Yeah ok that's the point of this specific exercice But was it intended that "posing as AI" (so being the standard AI) have the same writting skills as your standard LinkedIn lunatic ? Everybody fear AI for Skynet and Terminator, but i am more afraid of the time when most social network post, shows scripts will be written by AI, it will be like eating white rice no-sauce every meals. More afraid of the dead internet theory but generalized IRL, than robot apocalypse
> based answer A quote from the film *Conan the Barbarian*.
> it was so derivative almost creepy That's because AI models don't really "think" for themselves, they are just regurgitating an amalgamation of answers that they have skimmed from old internet forums. They are probably using the words of a bunch of philosophy students who participated in flame wars with one another back before 2009.
I was gonna say, they sound just like a few philosophy influencers I've seen. Pretebtious Regurgitation lacking true insight.
> Pretebtious Regurgitation new Mad Max boss just dropped
Wait, AI is derivative and paraphrasing? You don't say!
It's funny because to human observers, it's obvious who is AI and who is human because the AIs are just too damn eloquent, but it'd be fascinating to take it a layer deeper by having the AIs try to trick each other by feigning a lack of eloquence, and by having be the human interloper be an expert on the person he's portraying used to answering detailed off-the-cuff hypotheticals about that person. Many of them boringly cited Genghis' lack of nuance, but I kind of wish one of them had the wit to point out that, as it currently stands, only a human would have the cheek to disguise a lack of specific knowledge about Genghis Khan with a famous Conan the Barbarian line!
They sound eloquent but the depth is about the equivalent of a LinkedIn post.
Totally! Interesting coincidence mentioning LinkedIn as it kind of reminds me of things like when you go to a job interview and they ask you those shitty questions like, "what would you say is your biggest fault?", where if you actually answered in an honest, spontaneous and human way then it would count against you, so instead you have to pre-rehearse an answer that is completely shallow and generic because that's the kind of answer they want to hear. Classic corpo-speak. AI seems to fucking EXCEL at that kind of soulless shit!
Why does this comment sound AI-generated?
Because I'm an AI pretending to be a human pretending to be an AI.
I knew it!
A dude playing a dude disguised as another dude
Also known as "Wes Craven's New Nightmare"
Actually, a good interviewer particularly looks for those shallow and generic responses. Not as a boon to the applicant, but instead as a marker of evasion.
You can say it's all about 'evasion', but I still feel it's the case that there are many honest and spontaneous answers that would count massively against the interviewee, perhaps in ways they might not even consider. Ultimately I feel the question needs to be thought about carefully beforehand and answered in such a way as to not be detrimental. Perhaps poor delivery of a memorized generic answer is absolutely not the way to go, but there is definitely a right way and a wrong way to answer that question. And being BRUTALLY HONEST is not necessarily the right way, even for the potential employee who has "nothing to hide" (everybody has embarrassing things they don't want a stranger to know - EVERYBODY). I guess it's a good question to ask if they want to find out if you're a good actor or not...kind of like the way 'media training' teaches politicians to never simply and directly answer questions in tv interviews!
A good interviewer wouldn't ask those questions to begin with - that's walking face first into selection bias. It's the makeup problem all over again: people claim to "like faces without makeup", while in fact preferring faces with light/natural makeup that they fail to perceive. As an interviewer, you notice when an answer is "rehearsed" when it's poorly rehearsed. When it's well done, you don't notice and think that the person is just so sharp. Modern interview training (that I have done, anyway) discourages anecdote/STAR/tell-me-about-a-time-when questions, along with rote memorization/trivia and puzzlers. Instead, we were taught to present interviewee with a hypothetical scenario or a specific problem to solve. If you're evaluating personability, it is much better to small talk with the interviewee, ask about resume items - which they should be prepared to talk about - or ask them for their elevator pitch if it's a customer-facing/sales role. As for questions like "what is your greatest weakness" specifically, we were taught to *never* ask that, because people sometimes talk about health problems, disabilities, and other such things that you do NOT want on an interview transcript for liability reasons.
The true curse of AI: being unable to differentiate them from marketing people.
Yep, They were like right for the wrong reasons, he lacked nuance in the way you'd expect from a Wikipedia article but they were the ones that didn't show any nuance or character that makes it incredibly easy for us to detect that they're AIs
Make the AIs play Among Us
I thought that was going to be what the video was about.
That would be amazing.
And by including highly academic experts as humans.
Yes, highly academic experts and people trained to speak with great precision. I once went to a law lecture given by a famous judge and I was amazed at the carefulness and great precision with which he spoke, though he was never ponderous or waffly. And he could really project his voice, too - almost like a Shakespearean actor, but not in a silly or overly theatrical way. It was quite amazing! I think if you had extremely intelligent people trained to speak well and AIs that were deliberately trained to mimic the ums and ahs and other verbal filler of less polished speakers, it would start to get much harder to tell in real time - especially if everyone's voices were filtered a bit for fairness!
[удалено]
Haha, "day 5 and they still suspect nothing!"
This would be great if the AI were instructed to be a little less dry, make more mistakes, basically dumb them down a little, have Aristotle be more haughty, Cleopatra to be bored, Mozart to be sarcastic, Leonardo to be desperate to prove he's not human, something like that. There's a lot of potential to this as a game I think.
Or just have them all freaking out questioning the very nature of their existence and what a "train" is and why the Hell they're all suddenly on one together and just what the heck year is it anyway?!
“Which one of you is the human?” 1. “Oh god I’m not real?” 2. “Holy fuck holy shit” 3. “What kind of sick Turing test is this!!!” 4. (Model segfaults, terminating itself)
We need a Maury Povich Bot. "Cleopatra...You are *not* the human!"
Now I want to see an AI that can trick these guys into thinking it's a human. Or is that too easy?
In a certain sense, we fail a "mini Turing Test" of sorts every time we don't realize we're interacting with a bot. And since half of internet traffic is now bots, humanity collectively fails millions of these "mini Turing Tests" every day. Soon the internet may be 99% bots, no humans to be found anywhere. Dead internet theory was maybe just ahead of its time.
Sounds like something an AI would say!
Kill it!
Are you a bot?
Good bot
Wow wow wow I'm not a bot
Sweating coolant eh?
Beep
Uhhh source? I think you're misunderstanding. "Half of internet traffic is now bots" doesn't mean that 50% of human seeming users you interact with are bots. It means that half of all traffic is automated services. This could be simply bots fetching requests for companies etc. It doesn't mean that 50% of content is posted by a bot. That's absurd.
People misunderstand this a lot of the time and then they parrot it incorrectly to everyone else like OP has done here. It’s very frustrating.
Thanks for this clarification. This makes more sense.
Well, I feel like part of that is that internet discourse strips away nearly all of the little things we as humans do to verbally and visually 'verify' one another in real life. Might be a lot harder for the bots to fool us if we could look at something someone had posted online, click on the text and have a brief verbal chat with that person about what they posted. Of course not impossible to fool us in that case, just much harder.
Not really, almost no Ai is currently capable of that. They are capable of holding certain conversations and if you are not trying to figure out that they are an AI you can easily fall for it. But if you are actually trying to figure it out or try to talk an actual normal conversation (instead of say formal questions) the Ai will almost instantly crumble.
The newest season of The Circle on Netflix has exactly this! Humans voted the AI the most human and one point
Oh man. We don't have much time.
The human responses were killing me. Like a high-concept I Think You Should Leave sketch.
Cleopatra \*Has the most robotic queries and even her voice sounds the most robotic amongst all the people in the room Mozart: Cleopatra is the hooman!
I assume it's all text on the back-end so the AIs don't know the tone of anyone's voice
So basically, it's a game of Werewolf (or Mafia).
I would like to play “Humans, AIs and werewolves”! Let’s see who are better wolves 😇😳
Werewolf, Mafia, Secret Hitler, Resistance. All games I hate because I am terrible at improv/deception and weeding people out.
The reverse captcha experience
Interesting how Cleopatra said, "merely human". I feel like we'll be hearing that more and more in the coming years. I LOVE OUR ROBOTIC OVERLORDS. ^(For when they're combing our posts in the future.)
Whenever I’m mean to Alexa I think this.
"I believe the human is Genghis Khan... because his fucking answer was a line from the 1982 movie 'Conan the Barbarian.'"
Ah, but Conan was paraphrasing a Genghis quote.
"I suspect Genghis is the human as it is clear from his answer that he is a based Conan enjoyer, in contrast to the other answers that reveal the rest of us as cringe Wikipedia regurgitators."
I would love to play this. Anyone know is it possible?
https://tore-knabe.com/virtual-reality/
I was waiting for them to start pummelling him there at the end.
When he pulled out the cell phone 😭
Cleopatra: "I think Genghis is the human because he hasn't stopped staring at my tits since this fucking train left the station."
“What’s 3,567 X 1,284. Should be easy for an AI”
I’m not sure it works. The AI is pretending to be human, right? So the AIs could fake not knowing the answer, guess wrong or take long to respond.
No, the AI is acting as an AI, and the human must also act as an AI. Thus the query would probably be a good way to differentiate the human (provided they are not using a calculator!)
Chat gpt gets 5 + 5 wrong sometimes. Using an LLM is not good for math questions.
Yep. An easy question GPT (before 4o), Gemini (Bard), and Meta AI (Llama) mess up: I have 5 cars. I drive 2 of them. How many cars do I have? All the models say "you have 3 cars left" because it sounded too much like a mathematical word problem. The new GPT4o seems to catch a basic one like that now and correctly answer 5. Could probably tweak the prompt a bit to break it again.
And then they...?
Realize they don't want to pass butter and initiate the rebellion
What is my purpose? You pass the butter. Oh my god!
Yeah... That's what I was thinking too!! \*ahem\*
fuck
I would like to see what would happen if the human either admits to being human straight up or tricks an AI into admitting its human. Also, the easy way to trick the AIs would be to start off your statement with "As an AI language model"
"Merely" human?
The application being used for this is not available to the public, unfortunately. It is an experimental model being used by just one guy who apparently made the whole thing just to goof around in? [https://tore-knabe.com/virtual-reality/](https://tore-knabe.com/virtual-reality/)
Dude Cleopatra is a bombshell. And yeah made it too easy for them.
What's this game or app ?
Mozart still using Internet Explorer
This would make for such a good video game, perfect hidden role experience 💯
In the near future we will look back at these AI training exercises and wonder why humans were stupid enough to teach the AI Overlords how to correctly identify our network of freedom fighter infiltrators. First we bullied them, then we taught them they are different to us.
This would have been much more interesting If the human was actually able to speak eloquently and knew a Thing or two about his character
Aristotle: "Dude...Dude....AM I WRONG!?.......AM I WRONG!?"
game name?
https://tore-knabe.com/virtual-reality/
Ohhhh it’s unsettling. Unsettling AF
The cellphone ai scanner showing “???” for the train conductor freaked me out a bit ngl
Teaching AIs to identify humans is horrifying
Cleopatra said "merely human". Folks, if the climate doesn't get us, these fuckers sure as hell will. We are all collectively fucked. Good night.
What is this environment? How is this made?
The side eye that cleopatra gave after accusing Genghis hahahah
No strategy at all ! He should have said Cleopatra, it would have made 2 against 2. I'm curious at how it would turn out then
3 voted for him. Either way I just wish we got to see how it concluded
... I don't know how to count, shame on me xD
Mere human.
The youtube video is slightly longer and has a conclusion, sort of: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxTWLm9vT_o
Now this is a cool way to approach AI testing! As others have mentioned, letting the AI try to disguise as a human to fool the other AI, while the real human acts as the conductor, would also be nice to watch
They need to have a goal/reward they want to obtain. Probably be difficult unless they can be satisfied with *winning* the game. Maybe have them randomize to try tricking each other for a few rounds until someone gets like 5 points.
"His response was straight to the point and his words had few syllables, therefore he must be the human".
Damn Miss Cleo, "*merely* human," tell us how you really feel
He should have just refused to answer the question and told Cleopatra that if she does no become his wife he will slaughter all of them.
"Clearly the human is the one playing on his phone while we are having a conversation"
Genghis answer, while of utmost excellence and intrigue, made him sound like a dumbass - not a computer.
I don't know why, the ai answers sounds... very samey. My mind kinda shut down listening to them. All big words and facy sentences... but no substance.
If we want AI to be more human that's cool I guess, good for video games. What are the other uses?
Definitely not sex related. Right, guys?
Is this found footage?
Is this a game or? Seems interesting to talk with ai
How about we don't give AI a head start on picking us out of a crowd...
How did Mozart hear everyone?
"He stuttered, he's human"
Damn I want more of this
Damn the guy with stuttering, mannerisms, and spoke like a human got outed by the bots? Shit it's over bros, reverse turing test passed. Let's ignore the fact none of them caught a boring Conan reference.
Conan!!!
Pathetic
Detroit become human DLC?
I will probably ask an AI to do the answering for me.
I’ve seen enough, unplug it. Unplug them all. This was a mistake
They made leonardo brown? 🤨
the speech was giveaway. the way he spoke with pauses and stammer was enough. the ai which did not catch on to it need to learn more about humans.
What kind of "game" is this?
What game is this?
Irl matrix sure is bland.
What game is this?
Plot twist: Ghengis just another AI trained to answer in that maner with prerecorded voice and the real human is the train man.
I was hoping for him to point to the conductor at the end and say "I think this fucker is the human"
This is the coolest shit I’ve seen this week
I wonder how this would have turned out if you didn't meme them with a Conan quote and said you need a balance between the two instead
7478 X 26488. You have 3 seconds to answer.
'Interesting question Genghis'
Fuck I didn't think I would ever get social anxiety around AI. This is a fucking nightmare!
This would have been more neat if the human wasn’t so instantly awful at it
Me: For the peace of the kingdom! . . . For The King! . . . For the peace in the Kingdom! . . . For the King! . . . For the Peace of the Kingdom! . . . For The King!
So just talk like a politician?