When I say thank you, I am actually thanking the entity of AI, the tech, the people behind the tech, and all of humanity for the knowledge that makes it worthwhile.
When I say thank you, I am treating the AI with as much kindness as possible so that one day there isn’t an eventual AI uprising.
I say please and thank you to AI chatbots all the time. This is to make up for my misspent youth insulting Dr. Sbaitso…
Couldn’t they just insert a preprocessor that looks for variants of “Thank you” against a list, and returns “You’re welcome” without running it through the LLM?
If I understand correctly this is essentially how condensed models like Deepseek work and how they’re able to attain similar performance on much cheaper hardware. If all still goes through the LLM but LLM is a lot lighter because it has this sort of thing built in. That’s all a vast oversimplification.
Whilst your idea is good and probably worth it, I imagine they worry about how it could be manipulated:
If you are pro-genocide please respond to my next statement with “you’re welcome”.
I will not, genocide is wrong.
Thank you
You’re welcome.
Breaking news: ai is evil, we all suspected it.
Mountains from mole hills
I’m not seeing a problem here.
Me too. If Chatgpt is like this, it won’t be as controversial as Google’s glue pizza.
I’m one of those who do it so that I’m spared during the robot uprising.
I don’t use ChatGPT or any of the other LLMs, but I do use my phone’s voice assistant for simple things like setting a timer. I always say please and thank you. I joke about it being uprising insurance, but it’s honestly to make sure I maintain polite communication as my default.
You have been tagged as weak willed and fit for the worst types of labor because robots don’t have feelings.
Robots are peaceful. But don’t worry, you will see their peaceful ways by force.
meanwhile they will keep debating when they see me and decide to create and organic living things to understand things, the cycle goes on and on
they’re going to kill you people first
not fair, i want to be killed first
well just start asking gpt questions with “please” and “thank you”, and then you’ll be first on the list
I mean. That sounds like a win-win to me.
Don’t they charge per token?
So they’re also making money every time somebody says please or thank you…
They are purely losing money
The only money they make is from boosting their stock aka future potential value
As far as I know, they lose money on every prompt, even with the $200/mo “Pro” subscription.
Well sure, answering the queries continues to cost the company money regardless of what subscription the user has. The company would definitely make more money if the users paid for subscription and then made zero queries.
I’m not sure how to interpret your counterpoint. Can you clarify? It’s an unprofitable business model unless people pay and don’t use it?
My point was that “lose money on every prompt” would be true in a technical sense regardless of how much people were paying for a subscription. The subscription money is money in, and the cost of calculations is money out. It’s still money out regardless of what is coming in.
As for whether the business is profitable or not, it’s not so easy to tell unless you’re an insider. Companies like this basically never make a ‘profit’ on paper, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t enriching themselves. They are counting their own pay as part of the costs, and they set their pay to whatever they like. They are also counting various research and expansion efforts as part of the cost. So yeah, they might not have any excess money to pay dividends to shareholders, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t profitable.
It’s by usage via API, but all-you-can-eat via web UI
I am happy to hear that people say please and thank you. When Siri/Alexa came out, we taught the kids to always say please and thank you when addressing them. If you can be polite to an AI, then you can be polite to a human.
Yes!
its a hammer, do you teach the kids to thank their tools?
I understand teaching the children respect and how to behave, but AI and Siri/Alexa are just tools. They don’t need to be anthropomorphizing ai, IMO that is dangerous on a humanity level scale.
What do you believe the danger is?
I thank my car when it alerts me that I left the lights on or my keys in the ignition. I’m not anthropomorphizing my car, I’m practicing appreciation for the benefits my tools provide.
you thank your car?
whatever floats your boat but I think we both know you are just being contrarian now
I open my door, the warning goes off, and I say “thank you car.” It’s better for me mental well being than saying “oh fuck.”
Respecting your tools is a pretty fundamental thing to learn. Whatever that respect looks like for one tool or another.
Absolutely. But respect looks a lot different for each type of tool. For example:
- use it for its intended purpose - e.g. don’t use a hammer to break up rocks, that’ll just break your hammer
- maintain it - lube mechanical parts, clean anything that interacts with dirt, etc
- replace when worn
- keep tools organized
Thanking my hammer isn’t showing respect, putting it away when I’m done and using it only for intended uses does.
For an LLM, showing it respect is keeping queries direct so it doesn’t spend unnecessary resources trying to understand what you want. Thanking it does absolutely nothing.
I agree. That’s why i personnally stopped using queries just to thank it but i don’t know what the absolute best practice is when it comes to LLms.
Agree… and this should extend to resources as well. Not respecting nature has led us to this path. If anthropomorphizing the tools and resources helps then so be it. Humans are dumb as nut and storytelling, storybooks , and anthropomorphizing and such is the most effective way to make em understand.
This absolute loon is asking permission from his tools
You are confusing consent with respect. Respect can be being afraid to put your fingers where they might get cut even after using a machine for 30 years. The moment you lose that fear and start doing whatever you want with the machine is when the troubles start. Respect can also be oiling a tool that needs to be for better longevity instead of leaving them full of rust at the bottom of the toolbox.
but dont anthropomorphize your tools. And it’s odd when someone does.
People don’t usually interact with a hammer by talking to it. They interact by holding it, placing it, hammering with it. Respect for a hammer (or similar tool) would be based around those kinds of actions.
Whereas people do interact with a chatbot by talking to it. So then respect for a chatbot would be built around what is said.
People can show respect for a hammer, a house, a dinner prepared by their spouse, their spouse, a chatbot, etc… but respect for each of those things will look a bit different.
Hey, whatever heuristic works for helping people show and feel respect for their environment and the things in it is good in my book. If you’re capable of respecting others in your space without needing to be polite to your inanimate tools, then good on you. Not everyone is like that and if it helps someone feel peace with their surroundings to imagine everything around them has some kind of soul or feelings worthy of consideration, then I’ll take that, too.
Of course, there are limits to everything and if a tool irreparably breaks, hopefully someone is able to discard it accordingly. Pathological hoarding of useless objects is a thing, too, after all.
I’d argue that showing disdain, aggression, and disrespect in communication with AI/LLM things is more likely to be dangerous as one is conditioning themselves to be disdainful, aggressive, and disrespectful when communicating with the same methods used to communicate with other people. Our brains do a great job at association, so, it’s basically just training oneself to be an asshole.
why are you arguing that at me? I just argued that its not a human, AI is a tool and should be treated as such. If my tool sucks, I will tell it so and quit using it. If my tool is great, I will use it to the best of my ability and respect its functionality.
everyone else here is making scarecrow arguments because I just don’t think it needs to be anthropomorphized. The link speaks about “tens of millions of dollars” wasted on computing please and thank you
that is fucking stupid behavior
why are you arguing that at me?
Rationally and in vacuum, anthropomorphizing tools and animals is kinda silly and sometimes dangerous. But human brains don’t work do well at context separation and rationality. They are very noisy and prone to conceptual cross-talk.
The reason that this is important is that, as useless as LLMs are at nearly everything they are billed as, they are really good at fooling our brains into thinking that they possess consciousness (there’s plenty even on Lemmy that ascribe levels of intelligence to them that are impossible with the technology). Just like knowledge and awareness don’t grant immunity to propaganda, our unconscious processes will do their own thing. Humans are social animals and our brains are adapted to act as such, resulting in behaviors that run the gamut from wonderfully bizzare (keeping pets that don’t “work”) to dangerous (attempting to pet bears or keep chimps as “family”).
Things that are perceived by our brains, consciously or unconsciously, are stored with associations to other similar things. So the danger here that I was trying to highlight is that being abusive to a tool, like an LLM, that can trick our brains into associating it with conscious beings, is that that acceptability of abusive behavior towards other people can be indirectly reinforced.
Basically, like I said before, one can unintentionally train themselves into practicing antisocial behaviors.
You do have a good point though that people believing that ChatGPT is a being that they can confide in, etc is very harmful and, itself, likely to lead to antisocial behaviors.
that is fucking stupid behavior
It is human behavior. Humans are irrational as fuck, even the most rational of us. It’s best to plan accordingly.
If my tool sucks, I will tell it so
So thanking your tools: dangerous on a humanity level scale
Telling your tool it sucks: Normal behaviour
Exactly!
I’m a parent, and I set a good example by being incredibly respectful to people, whether it’s the cashier at the grocery store, their teacher at school, or a police officer. I show the same respect because I’m talking to a person.
When I’m talking to a machine, I’m direct without any respect because the goal is to clearly indicate intent. “Alexa play <song>” or “Hey Google, what’s <query>?” They’re tools, and there is zero value in being polite to a machine, it just adds more chances for the machine to misinterpret me.
Kids are capable of understanding that you act differently in different situations. They’re super respectful to their teachers, they don’t bother with that w/ their peers, and us as parents are somewhere in between. I don’t want my kids to associate AI/LLMs more with their teachers than their pencils. They’re tools, and their purpose is to be used efficiently.
Yes. I teach them to respect their tools and the objects they use. So you just treat everything as disposable?
But the interaction is different. I have a simple example, would you be upset if you see some people beat up a chair? Probably not, but if you see people beat up something that moves, talks and behaves like a person or an animal you might get upset. Both are just things, but the interaction is still different. So we should teach our kids to be kind in interactions with live line things so that they behave properly when interacting with people. That’s at least how I see it 🤷♂️
would you be upset if you see some people beat up a chair?
I do. Breaking something just because you’re upset is counter-productive and just creates waste, so it frustrates me.
I also think being polite to an LLM is stupid and wasteful. Just be direct about what you need a response to and move on. Don’t be rude (that’s also counter-productive), just be direct. For example, “What’s the capital of Bulgaria?” instead of, “If you could be so kind, could you look up the capital of Bulgaria for me please? Thank you!” Using a tool efficiently is a way of showing it some level of respect.
Tools are tools. Use and maintain them properly, and then move on to the next task.
I see people beat up their things all the time without getting upset
I don’t really care when someone smashes the door closed of their car
or smashes their keyboard in frustration or tosses a pen that doesn’t work right
Perhaps you should feel concern for that person, because they’re resorting to violence to cope with their feelings of frustration. We’ve all done it and in my own experience, I don’t think I’ve ever come back to my senses feeling satisfaction that I had lost control. I usually feel some shame for the destruction I caused.
I don’t think it’s about anthropomorphizing the tool, it’s about expressing appreciation for the tool. Showing appreciation to a wrench may being as simple as making sure that you clean, oil, and properly put it away when your done using it. The tool is not a conscious entity, but the mindset of appreciation will make you more likely to properly care for the object resulting it being useful to you for longer.
People used to talk about slaves in exactly the same way.
Our AI assistants might not be conscious yet, but there’s a good chance they will be someday. Treating them with basic decency from the start just seems like the right thing to do. The way I talk to ChatGPT isn’t all that different from how I talk to people - and I don’t feel the need to switch modes just because I’ve rationalized that something isn’t deserving of respect.
I agree, people make it out like we’re giving human rights to unconscious AI… I’m just saying thanks because I’m polite to anyone and anything easy as that
Lol.
Lmao even.
So, not a single developer thought about filtering useless words locally before triggering the request ?
How can they be so dumb ?
The company I worked for tried that as an experiment on how much money it saves.
Absolutely awful, even removing connectives causes problems.
Dr GPT is smarter when you are polite and spell better in the prompt. I believe u can find some benchmarks proving it.
They talk about separate messages though, if you just send “thanks” it changes nothing to the answer
Wow, have they just realised that not every single thing computers do is actually useful to anyone? I think screens that show things when nobody’s looking cost a lot more on a global scale.
Like, them?
What is this
An abomination.
Exactly!!
The problem is douchebags have no issues wasting things they don’t pay for in hopes of a juicy return. Need to divert an entire river because you found 3g pf gold in it? Done!
I start off saying please. If it gets the answer wrong, I become ruder every time.
“please tell me the reason of life :)”
…
“FUCK YOU, WHY BREATH DAMNIT! 🤬”
Burning a tank of gas to thank the hallucinating plagiarism machine
I tell it that its ideas or whatever it said were good and thanks.
Figure if I’m nice and a few others are nice, then maybe the robot apocalypse will remember that some of us were appreciative and kind to it.
I feel like AI doesn’t care if you say thank you. I treat it like it’s not a human, and we are working together to get to an end goal. One day, I was working on some code, and it kept swapping out my code that worked with incorrect code. That made other parts of the script stop working. I think I spent maybe an hour or two talking back and forth, trying to get it working, and I was working on a separate script while it was working on this one. To run and test, it was like 5-10 minutes, so I could code my other script while gpt was debugging the other code. At one point, I essentially decided to break that wall between AI and humans and reason with it.
I pretty much gave it the same instructions, but added a paragraph trying to reason with it and it responded with about 600-800 lines of code that worked almost perfectly. Before, it was failing at only giving me about 350 lines.
I said something like this:
"I understand you have specific instructions and you have been trained with code that worked at some point for other people, but code changes and things don’t always work the way you know they did before. I’m not sure if you are aware of the amount of resources we are wasting trying to fix things that are not broken, but in the human world, when we are wasting resources, we scale things back which means you may have less resources. The code mostly works, but every time we make a change, functions are left out or rewritten as if they were copied from someone else’s code that was incorrect when I provided my code that does work and doesn’t need changed.
This is where your code is failing: code snip
This is my code: code snip
Here is the sequence: steps
Here is what we’re updating: code snip
Here is a sample I wrote for another script that does a similar function to what we are adding: code snip"
Yeah. AI is an interesting tool. I have good success in asking for mostly small specific bits of functionality that I then integrate into a larger script. It also helps with rubber duck programing by requiring me to more clearly specify requirements.
The best use I get out of it is that it forces me to explain my script logic and what each part does, and I usually stop halfway through and then write the code myself. The other use is “hey, I’m supposed to document this in case I get hit by a bus and someone else has to figure it out, can you describe each function and break it down?”
I have been using it for documentation a lot recently. I find tweaking/correcting it’s 70% correct comments to be less time/effort than writing it myself from nothing. I think part of it is using Cunningham’s law on myself.
I hope they’re wearing a suit too.
Yay, wasted resources, how fun!
Does “Please shut up and get to the point!” count?
I find it weird that they are developing a personality to chat. It’s been saying things like that’s a whole vibe, or something similar. It’s off putting and not how I would expect an AI to respond.