> The only question is is the entity interesting and/or correct.

This already falls apart though. There are while categories of things which I find "incorrect" and would take up as an argument with a fellow human. But trying to change the mind of an LLM just feels like a waste of my time.

▲

throwaway2027 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

>But trying to change the mind of an LLM just feels like a waste of my time.

It often is with humans as well.

	▲	AlecSchueler 9 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Indeed it is, and there are often times I choose not to engage with my fellow humans. But the exceptions are valuable to me and to others. With an LLM I don't feel there would be any exception, that's the difference.

▲

yellowapple 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Arguing for the sake of convincing the other person is doomed to inevitable failure, even without the possibility of that person being an LLM.

Arguing for the sake of convincing onlookers reading the conversation is more likely to be effective, and in that case it doesn't matter if the other person is an LLM.

▲

skeledrew 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Instead of wanting to change the mind of the other entity, how about focusing on coming to a mutual understanding of what is "correct"? That way it shouldn't matter much if said entity is human, LLM or dog. Unless you're just arguing to push your "correct" on other humans, with little care about their "correct".

	▲	AlecSchueler 9 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It feels like you've loaded quite a lot on a way that feels unfair: "pushing" and "little care" etc. I maybe should have used a term like "discuss" target than the more loaded "argue." Look, I'll give you a loose example: It's not uncommon to see a post making an "error" I know from experience. I might take the time to help someone more quickly learn what I felt I learnt to help me get out of that mistaken line of thought. If it's an LLM why would I care? There's thousands of other people, even other LLMs, that I could be talking to instead. You've set up a framework here where "mutual understanding" is the end goal but that's just not always what's on the line.