The framing of an LLM's response as truth vs lie is in itself incorrect.

In order to lie, one needs to understand what truth and objective reality are.

Even with people, when a flat-earther tells you the earth is flat, they're not lying, they're just wrong.

All LLM output is speculation. All speculation, by definition, has some probability of being incorrect.

---

We can go even deeper in a philosophical sense. If I made the audacious claim that 2 +2 = 4, I may think it's true, but I'm still speculating that the objective reality I experience is the same one others also experience, and that my senses and mental faculties, and therefore the qualia making up my reality, are indeed intact, correct, and functional. So is there a degree of speculation when I made that claim?

Regardless, I am able to agree upon a shared reality with the rest of the world, and I also share a common understanding of truth and untruth. If I lied, it can only be caused by an intention to mislead others. For example, if I claimed to be the president of the united states, of course that would be incorrect (thankfully!), but since we all agree that no one reading this post would actually be mislead into thinking I am the POTUS, then it isn't a lie. Perhaps sarcasm, a failed attempt at humor, or just trolling. it is untruth, but it isn't a lie, no one was mislead. You need intent (LLM isn't capable of one), and that intent needs to be at least in part, an intent to mislead.

They're not saying the LLM is lying; they're saying the human user is lying by using the counterfeit as though it were the genuine artifact.

> Even with people, when a flat-earther tells you the earth is flat, they're not lying, they're just wrong.

Atleast some of them know they're wrong and are thus lying.