[We argue that at minimum, the outputs of LLMs like ChatGPT are soft bullshit: bullshit–that is, speech or text produced without…

wtf-scientific-papers:

[We argue that at minimum, the outputs of LLMs like ChatGPT are soft bullshit: bullshit–that is, speech or text produced without concern for its truth–that is produced without any intent to mislead the audience about the utterer’s attitude towards truth. We also suggest, more controversially, that ChatGPT may indeed produce hard bullshit: if we view it as having intentions (for example, in virtue of how it is designed), then the fact that it is designed to give the impression of concern for truth qualifies it as attempting to mislead the audience about its aims, goals, or agenda. So, with the caveat that the particular kind of bullshit ChatGPT outputs is dependent on particular views of mind or meaning, we conclude that it is appropriate to talk about ChatGPT-generated text as bullshit, and flag up why it matters that – rather than thinking of its untrue claims as lies or hallucinations – we call bullshit on ChatGPT.]

Submitter comment: One of my favourite recent papers on AI - the authors pull no punches, actually substantiate their argument, and it’s also extremely readable and hilarious. Free to read: ChatGPT is Bullshit