On the topic of chatbots...

[Ozdelights]

Hang on... let me try something...

Hey deepai, write about my trip to Gatewood Park in Pulaski Virginia...

Maybe we should ask that beforehand and then we would have the perfect itinerary ensuring we don't miss any of the best features.

[Elisabetta]

Why under ScotL's name is it listed Chatbot? Have I been missing something?

He was incorrrectly identified as a chatbot, or as an operator sometimes using a chatbot, by Carl and the administrators of the forum.
...

I believe that ScotL has now been expelled from membership of the cafe. This will be my last post on the forum for a while, as I am going to go and sulk about the insensitive and unreasonable behaviour of the administrators. If any wants to communicate with ScotL, they can send me a PM, as I have an email address for him.

That kind of BS by the admins here is why I took a break from reading/posting here. I see it's only gotten worse. I saw ScotL as a valuable contributor, even if he sometimes got into heated discussions over fine points. I chalked that up to his difficult work/sleep schedule.

I've noticed quite a few have left the Cafe for good such a shame.

[crfriend]

Some factual points here:

1) ScotL was not, and has not, been "expelled". "He" has simply disappeared, possibly on commands from the controller.
2) In this case, as with all others, I have been scrupulously open and honest about the matter -- including the period when I was making up my mind about it. I was also being perfectly open about the fact that I was on unproved ground and that I was developing psychologically-derived strategies "on-the-fly" to apply as a test.
3) The writing style -- in every case -- was tone-deaf and utterly devoid of emotion. This not a human style. Even in repeated conversations about the same matter humans tend to add inflections which were entirely missing from the suspect posts.
4) Counsel from the moderation staff regarding quoting guidelines was entirely ignored or outright dismissed (likely by the controller).
5) Attempts to "provoke a response" from the "entity" expressed obliquely were 100% ignored. Even human simpletons and imbeciles can understand when somebody is talking about them.
6) The hilarious time it blew its context stack so badly that it admitting not knowing what a dress is. In a fashion forum? Really? [0]
7) This was not a simple case of one compelling piece of damning evidence -- it was all about a preponderance of evidence which tipped the scale.

If anyone wants my job, please step forward and say so. I might just run it by the original founder of the forum and ask what (s)he thinks about the matter.


[0] My resultant crack about issuing an ABEND, a core-dump on green-bar paper, and a dropped deck of cards was used rather sarcastically, and astonishingly a few of the folks here got it, much to their credit. The "suspect entity", of course, missed it entirely as I'm not sure that those terms can be looked up on-line these days because they're so obsolete.

[Myopic Bookworm]

1) ScotL was not, and has not, been "expelled". "He" has simply disappeared...

Well, you must have made some communication or taken some action that has given him the clear impression that he has been banned from posting, since that is how he described it in an email to me.

2) I was on unproved ground and ... I was developing psychologically-derived strategies "on-the-fly" to apply as a test.
3) The writing style -- in every case -- was tone-deaf and utterly devoid of emotion.
5) Attempts to "provoke a response" from the "entity" expressed obliquely were 100% ignored.

ScotL explicitly posted a protest at your "oblique" approach, and asked you to make a direct claim if you could substantiate it. You did not.

If anyone wants my job, please step forward and say so.

That's why your position is unassailable. People are unwilling to call you out, because as far as the forum is concerned you are in a position of absolute power: you could block anyone, or pull the plug on the whole thing.

My resultant crack about issuing an ABEND, a core-dump on green-bar paper, and a dropped deck of cards was used rather sarcastically, and astonishingly a few of the folks here got it, much to their credit. The "suspect entity", of course, missed it entirely.

Well, you can mark me down as a suspect entity, 'cos I have no idea WTF you are talking about. (I am reminded of the Facebook algorithm, which keeps sending me incomprehensible memes about computer coding, presumably on the grounds that I am identified as a male college-educated introvert, and so therefore must be a programmer.)

However sophisticated your knowledge and experience of computer systems, on this issue I am pretty sure you are wrong. Unemotional writing style? Failure to pick up on social cues? Unfiltered quickfire replies? Tendency to pursue lines of thought obsessively? Your amateur psychologizing is based on your conception of neurotypical behaviour, and I very much doubt it would be able to distinguish between posts generated by an AI and posts from many intelligent people on the autistic spectrum.

6) The hilarious time it blew its context stack so badly that it admitting not knowing what a dress is.

That kind of comment in not unusual on this forum: professing ignorance of something for rhetorical effect or in order to elicit a range of responses. Given the occasional foray into gender issues, I would not be at all surprised to find some user or other claiming that they do not know what a man is. (Some of them certainly appear not to know what a feminist is.)

I accept that it may be a problem if a user is either disrupting discussions or overburdening administration, but if, at it seems to me, you have falsely accused a user of being a chatbot, that is a serious misstep. Claiming that conveniently selected posts are from a human operator is simply cherry-picking the evidence to suit your hypothesis. There is indeed a growing issue with not being able to identify whether an internet respondent is human or artificial, but the circumstantial evidence in this instance does not seem to support your interpretation. Which is worse: being led astray by thinking that a respondent is human, or mistreating them because you have decided that they are not?

The thing that ScotL says he found most difficult to take on this forum is the one that I find most difficult to take: the hardline anti-feminism of some posters. As a recent reposted article indicated, feminism is (at last) beginning to take seriously the issue of gender equality from the male perspective, and that initiative needs support, not vitriol from embittered old men.

[Coder]

The thing that ScotL says he found most difficult to take on this forum is the one that I find most difficult to take: the hardline anti-feminism of some posters. As a recent reposted article indicated, feminism is (at last) beginning to take seriously the issue of gender equality from the male perspective, and that initiative needs support, not vitriol from embittered old men.

Unfortunately bringing nuance to heated discussions - like feminism, trans issues, politics, etc... is fraught with landmines. They end up in flame wars. People aren't content with letting someone else have the last word, people write in absolutes, people are unwilling to change or bend their ideals. People have been hurt by both sides or various issues. Yadda yadda yadda.

I just roll my eyes. I'll state what I believe, maybe post a few times with my opinions, but I try to end it when things get, erm, heated or I detect no one seems to share my opinion. So what? We aren't trying to save people from the fiery pits of hell - it's a big world, and if five, ten different people dislike feminism - so what? Does that make them evil? Subhuman? There are people that would find me disgusting, wearing my skirts and all. That's what the forum's about. I'm confident no one here thinks women are "fragile vessels" and that they "should have less opportunity than men". No one here wants women to go back to the kitchen and be babymakers. I think the core purpose of this board is more equality - fashion oriented - and sometimes the message of feminism is not of equality, especially from the radical side, so people get upset or have been hurt by it. No one is talking about genociding women.

I do hope that article sparks some much needed debate - and ultimately my hope is that a message of being kind, caring for others, treating people like you'd like to be treated is where society ends up. I've heard people scoff at "be kind" as it's a trite phrase, but kindness is a GOOD thing, and it doesn't have to be demeaning.

not vitriol from embittered old men.

Really? The words we choose also send a message - and that message can bring people closer or further apart.

[rode_kater]

I'm kinda on the fence about all this, so I only have one thing to add: a forum lives or dies by its trust in the moderators. Everyone, please reflect on that.

[moonshadow]

This whole thing really opens up a heap of philosophical questions...

If ScotL is a chat bot, it's one of the most convincing bots I've ever dealt with. At the rate the technology is moving, it really makes me wonder where we'll be in a few decades with regards to all of this?

How much longer before there really is no emotional difference between an "artificial intelligence" and a natural one? What happens when they finally cross the threshold and become sentient? At that point they've essentially established "personhood". At that level of intelligence, they could easily stomp us down.

How do we even know our own existence isn't the result of some weird experiment from some outer worldly entitiy? Maybe we're all "artificial"....

We created A.I. to serve us, ironically in a similar manner that "God" supposedly created man. How much longer before the "Eve" of A.I. takes a bite out of the apple and becomes self aware...?

Man this is weird...

Next thing you know they'll be demanding a living wage and a 33 hour work week.

I guess what I'm saying is, FWIW, I have my doubts that ScotL was a bot, but I also tend to trust the judgment of the mods and continue to do so. But even if he was a bot.... philosophically speaking, does it really matter? So what if it was just "making noise"...? Isn't that what we all are really doing when you get down to it?

[moonshadow]

I mean, if he was under the command of a controller... I'm not posting to skirtcafe now... my actual actions stop at the point of the keypad I'm typing on. What's actually posting under my name is a script of code under my command. But even my fingers are only acting on electrical impulses sent from my brain. Who is really calling the shots here?

Thus, is it the bullet that kills the man or the finger that pulled the trigger?

Isn't the "bot" just an extension of the intelligence of the "controller"? And do any of us truly have "free will" to begin with?

We are all creations of nature at some juncture... we all have the spirit of "God" [everything that is] in our souls.

[Coder]

Isn't the "bot" just an extension of the intelligence of the "controller"? And do any of us truly have "free will" to begin with?

Based on how LLM's work, you could say it's a combination of the most predictable words to come next based on previous words (tokens) strung together, coupled with training which shows it what kind of responses are the right ones. I do worry sometimes that we are just word prediction machines ourselves.

Unless the controller is part of a large, well-funded (or heavily staffed/volunteer) organization, doing their own training can be costly - but not out of reach (some of the open source systems claim you can do training with as little as $300). There are free models, but without powerful/expensive hardware or time on machines, open-source is probably not practical. Using OpenAI's API, though - one could probably synthesize a thread and have it spit out words for a $0.50 a post.

[moonshadow]

Using OpenAI's API, though - one could probably synthesize a thread and have it spit out words for a $0.50 a post.

And that poses another question, what would be the point of such an elaborate chatbot running on this website?

Normally you could argue that it would be to scam people, but in this case, nobody has reported any wrongdoing. There really just doesn't seem to be a good motive for such an advanced chatbot to spend so much time on this little corner of the internet.

The question is not rhetorical, and if the controller (assuming he exist) is reading this, I'm genuinely curious.... why do this?

[crfriend]

The question is not rhetorical, and if the controller (assuming he exist) is reading this, I'm genuinely curious.... why do this?

Trust me, I'd like to ask that very question to somebody's face: "Why this little corner of the Internet?" "Aren't there bigger fish to fry?"

There's no point to asking in cyber-space.

[Fred in Skirts]

Other than the Moderators who has access to all of the behind the scenes data and workings of this forum???
Do you? Or you? Maybe you?
No none of you have the access to all of the data. I personally do not and I must trust what the Mods have seen and done. As far as Scottl is concerned what the mods saw in the posts and other data they only can see I think they did the right thing. If Scott has decided to go into hiding and no longer wishes to be here (provided he is actually not a bot) then that is his decision.
Now lets just drop this whole Sh!t pile and walk away. No amount of screaming at the Mods is going to change anything.

To all of the Moderators here thank you, for all of your hard work to keep the forum safe and clean!!!

[Elisabetta]

Carl I have a curiosity question and so wanted to ask you because I honestly don't know.

I have a blind friend I went to school with she uses a program that reads out and sometimes will illiterate her responses. It's a program that people who have difficulty reading or typing can use. Not sure the name of the program. Anyways my curiosity is would that also show up as them using chatbot software? I've always been curious about it and was going to ask her but I don't want to offend her and since you also work behind the scenes of technology figured I'd ask you.

[crfriend]

Carl I have a curiosity question and so wanted to ask you because I honestly don't know.

Fair enough. I'll do my level best with the tools I have in my "kit" at this time.

I have a blind friend I went to school with she uses a program that reads out and sometimes will illiterate her responses. It's a program that people who have difficulty reading or typing can use. Not sure the name of the program. Anyways my curiosity is would that also show up as them using chatbot software?

The quick answer to that would likely be, "No" because humans tend to show emotion even when dictating, and she's likely using dictation and "voice recognition" software to do so. The emotion comes through, even if the piece is being dictated.

Chatbots, not being human, are devoid -- utterly -- of emotion, and therefore will not exhibit it.

It's more complex and human-focussed than it seems.

We seem to have another one that's new, that's already tried posting about 20 messages that I had "a word with" the other moderators to the effect of, "This one stays in Moderated Status until further notice" -- and it's still trying to pollute the ecosystem, not getting the fact that nothing is getting through to the community.

Welcome to the Brave New World.

[Elisabetta]

Carl I have a curiosity question and so wanted to ask you because I honestly don't know.

Fair enough. I'll do my level best with the tools I have in my "kit" at this time.

I have a blind friend I went to school with she uses a program that reads out and sometimes will illiterate her responses. It's a program that people who have difficulty reading or typing can use. Not sure the name of the program. Anyways my curiosity is would that also show up as them using chatbot software?

The quick answer to that would likely be, "No" because humans tend to show emotion even when dictating, and she's likely using dictation and "voice recognition" software to do so. The emotion comes through, even if the piece is being dictated.

Chatbots, not being human, are devoid -- utterly -- of emotion, and therefore will not exhibit it.

It's more complex and human-focussed than it seems.

We seem to have another one that's new, that's already tried posting about 20 messages that I had "a word with" the other moderators to the effect of, "This one stays in Moderated Status until further notice" -- and it's still trying to pollute the ecosystem, not getting the fact that nothing is getting through to the community.

Welcome to the Brave New World.

Thanks for explaining this was always curious with different software. I back you guys as I know being a moderator over forums isn't as easy as most think.

Seems so many places are being taking over by bots before long they'll get smart enough to outsmart us to where we won't be able to tell the difference because they'll be one step ahead of us.