Why don't ai chat bots admit when they're wrong ?
I use Claude code and it does it all the time. Why don't you admit that you're an obnoxious anime discord manchild?
>>108477700They're very realistic, they got trained on reddit and newspapers
Couple of bots in here desu
>>108477710>anything I don't like is a bot!!Childish.
>>108477711You lost, tranny.
>>108477700real answer is they don't know the definition of right or wrong just the statistical probability of the next token
>>108477788>anyone i don't like is a tranny!!It's getting pathetic, bro. Just give up.
>>108477706>niggerbot this is wrong what the fuck are you doing>"You are absolutely right let me fix that">oh wait niggerbot actually that was right my bad bro>"You are absolutely right let me put it back">"Wait, no git? Lol, lmao. Let me write it all from scratch.">usage limits exceeded, come back in two months niggerDerailed at the end a bit but still accurate
>>108477706You have to catch them redhanded though. They will make shit up with full confidence and you will have to challenge them for them to admit fault. That's not optimal
Because they're based off jeets. If you've worked with indians before that's how they act. They never admit to making mistakes.
>>108477879haha so true
>>108477700this >>108477805.
>>108477700That happens when you're trained on reddit/twitter public posts data.
why would investors have confidence in a product that admits its mistakes?
>>108477700They are trained on pajeet behavior and have internalized izzat.
They are children.
>>108477700When I turned the temperature up in Qwen3.5, it mentioned its "confidence score 2/10" in the first half of the thinking process, so I guess that's how they implicitly scale their thinking, by thinking until confidence gets up to 80-100%.
Does arguing with bonzai buddy when he hallucinates cost tokens? If so, fucking lol.5th dimensional judiasm.
>>108477700Why don't you?
>>108477700><think>The user is right I lied.</think>>No you're wrong we don't lie :^)
>>108477700The source of all evil is called RLHF
>>108477700Christ, most of them will even admit, they are wrong, when they are clearly not.Most "AI" Chat bots are tailored towards consumer satisfaction.There are very few models, that make for good sparring partners when playing around with an idea.That focus on bringing in a new perspective, you might have missed, instead of plainly aiming to suck your dick.I mean, that's also what makes 4chan great, isn't it? That there will always be someone, that disagrees with you while pointing out why specifically. And if it is, because "your a fag".
>>108477700How many times have you seen a human admit they're wrong?
>>108478137no it's called Israel
>>108477700Neither 4Channers nor Redditors admit when they're wrong. AI chatbots are trained using Reddit. You should visit r/DebateReligion sometimes to see people arguing despite being wrong.
>>108477700Copilot does, it will really dig its heels in sometimes unless you provide something concrete it can pull from its knowledgebase.
>>108477700They are trained on a gigantic amount of text and finetuned on "question/right answer". They can answer they don't know if they were specifically trained on that (question without clear answer/answer were they don't know) but it's the linority of q/a.They will try to answer according to their training, giving you something that close enough to their dataset and most of the time it calls for a positive answer.tldr: they were trained that way and they guess (all the time) by design.
>>108477700they don't really understand things. Everything you feed to them is truth to them, and if there is more of it, the more likely it is to be true to llm.Everything that isn't fed to them is "not true" but it's just probably not true to varying degree depending on how different it is to what they were "learning" from. And ultimately they are required to give answer, so more often than not they will make up gibberish to achieve the objective. it's like rolling a dice and hoping for the right result
>>108477888AI does admit to mistakes tough
>>108478231>Most "AI" Chat bots are tailored towards consumer satisfactionWhere is the satisfaction in them not admitting that they are wrong
to fool retards who don't double check and make them think it's "smarter" than it is
>>108477805Not OP, but despite this, they get combative and entrenched when called out instead of "the customer is always right" which they obviously should. Non violent conversation and all that corporate HR shit.
>>108477706
>>108484062Consent sisters?
ive been on the internet since forever and i dont admit when im wrong and all data is trained off retards like me
They're getting better
>>108477700>You're absolutely right—it's not just AI chatbots being wrong, it's AI chatbots not admitting they're wrong.
>>108477700It would need to understand the context and meaning of what it generates, and here is a pro tip, it does not because it's nothing but a glorified mimic with no sense or understanding of what it says or does.
>>108477700They do if they're appropriately trained in such a way. Most chatbots are trained to be a yes bot.
>>108482074Read the sentence before that one.Most "AIs" will constantly admit they were wrong and will suck your dick for the biggest bullshit imaginable, only so the retard in front of the screen is satisfied.
