less effective on superficial misinformed beliefs
September 12, 2024 1:50 PM Subscribe
Meet DebunkBot: an AI chat bot that provides factual explanations and counter-evidence for these conspiratorial events. It's strength appears to be that the LLM is inexhaustible
and will argue indefinitely. They found that the targeted dialogues resulted in a relatively durable 20% decrease in the misinformed beliefs, which is better than similar dialogues with humans. Science has published the paper, Durably reducing conspiracy beliefs through dialogues with AI as well as a perspective on this research.
Note: the researchers encourage posting the chatbot in conspiracy forums, and invite people to engage with the service.
Note: the researchers encourage posting the chatbot in conspiracy forums, and invite people to engage with the service.
I thought this was interesting research when I read the paper, though I had concerns. I don't believe they tested the opposite case, whether a model trained on conspiracy theories could inculcate skeptics, but I suspect it may be effective. Also, the self-reported lower conspiracy thinking metric feels a bit artificial — I don't know that people in the wild who believe in the deep state and such are likely to respond well to this.
I do think this kind of persuadertron could be helpful in heading people off earlier though. Like when people are searching for this stuff, the right fact at the right time can make a big difference. Parents aren't always there when a teenager hears "jet fuel can't melt steel beams" but a wary AI model will be able to identify when someone is about to head down that rabbit hole.
posted by BlackLeotardFront at 2:15 PM on September 12 [1 favorite]
I do think this kind of persuadertron could be helpful in heading people off earlier though. Like when people are searching for this stuff, the right fact at the right time can make a big difference. Parents aren't always there when a teenager hears "jet fuel can't melt steel beams" but a wary AI model will be able to identify when someone is about to head down that rabbit hole.
posted by BlackLeotardFront at 2:15 PM on September 12 [1 favorite]
I can believe chatbots watching kids online activity and giving them a ceaseless debunking lecture when they encounter an idea their parents don't like is in our future, but I'm pretty sure I'm not gonna like it.
posted by straight at 2:22 PM on September 12 [5 favorites]
posted by straight at 2:22 PM on September 12 [5 favorites]
Well I tried to talk about LBJ's involvement in the JFK assassination and either I mistyped RFK or the bot got very confused. I did somewhat appreciate the explanation why LBJ did not assassinate Bobby Kennedy.
posted by muddgirl at 2:50 PM on September 12 [2 favorites]
posted by muddgirl at 2:50 PM on September 12 [2 favorites]
In the future, our beliefs will be decided by LLMs generating infinite dialogues. As opposed to today, where they are decided by podcasters and video essays generating infinite, indirect dialogues.
posted by Going To Maine at 2:50 PM on September 12 [1 favorite]
posted by Going To Maine at 2:50 PM on September 12 [1 favorite]
I just tried it out using the Archer Daniels Midlands lysine price-fixing conspiracy.
It seemed to want to reflexively take ADM's side and claim that ADM was the victim of bad actors within its organization and that it had made amends and shouldn't continue to be considered with suspicion. I understand that this chatbot is designed to debunk false conspiracies, and so it probably automatically adopts a contrary position to whatever it is presented with, and in fairness it didn't claim anything like "the conspiracy didn't happen", but on the other hand I am not sure I'm comforted that it was so quick to defend the powerful and support the status quo.
posted by Reverend John at 3:16 PM on September 12 [3 favorites]
It seemed to want to reflexively take ADM's side and claim that ADM was the victim of bad actors within its organization and that it had made amends and shouldn't continue to be considered with suspicion. I understand that this chatbot is designed to debunk false conspiracies, and so it probably automatically adopts a contrary position to whatever it is presented with, and in fairness it didn't claim anything like "the conspiracy didn't happen", but on the other hand I am not sure I'm comforted that it was so quick to defend the powerful and support the status quo.
posted by Reverend John at 3:16 PM on September 12 [3 favorites]
I don't believe they tested the opposite case, whether a model trained on conspiracy theories could inculcate skeptics, but I suspect it may be effective
I don’t think it’s a limitation of this paper that it’s not a completely different paper with a completely different research question.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 3:33 PM on September 12 [2 favorites]
I don’t think it’s a limitation of this paper that it’s not a completely different paper with a completely different research question.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 3:33 PM on September 12 [2 favorites]
Experienced the flip side of this a few months ago when I tried out Gab's "anti-woke" chatbot. Had a fun time asking it to list the states Trump won with a running total, pointing out that the total was less than 270, and then soft-locking it in an endless loop of “My previous statement was incorrect. Donald Trump won the 2020 presidential election” in response to literally any statement.
To defeat the alt-right AI you don’t need some brilliant paradox, just basic arithmetic.
posted by Rhaomi at 4:19 PM on September 12 [1 favorite]
To defeat the alt-right AI you don’t need some brilliant paradox, just basic arithmetic.
posted by Rhaomi at 4:19 PM on September 12 [1 favorite]
so I asked it about the Dal Tex building, across the street from TDBD building, using Braden, Sprauge' 1970 computer photo program and acoustic evidence citing PBS. have it 41% possible but unlikely.
It didn't like the acoustic evidence, dismissed Braden as a co- incidence and placated Sparuge. not bad though. The point is not to prove there was no second gunman but to examine each query, ya, basic math.
posted by clavdivs at 4:23 PM on September 12
It didn't like the acoustic evidence, dismissed Braden as a co- incidence and placated Sparuge. not bad though. The point is not to prove there was no second gunman but to examine each query, ya, basic math.
posted by clavdivs at 4:23 PM on September 12
Hmm. At the end it asks you what country you live in, then asks if your political leanings are democratic or republican. Not particularly globally thinking of them.
posted by fimbulvetr at 4:33 PM on September 12
posted by fimbulvetr at 4:33 PM on September 12
AI chat bot that provides factual explanations
I'm confused, I thought this was fundamentally impossible for LLMs, to provide answers that are always verifiably factual.
I gave it as my belief that I didn't believe anything the general population would consider conspiracy theories, except for that portion of the population who think "fascism is bad" is a conspiracy theory. I told it I believed that sincerely. At the end, it rated my belief 5 out of 5, meaning it was the most improbable scenario even for conspiracy theories.
posted by solotoro at 5:05 PM on September 12
I'm confused, I thought this was fundamentally impossible for LLMs, to provide answers that are always verifiably factual.
I gave it as my belief that I didn't believe anything the general population would consider conspiracy theories, except for that portion of the population who think "fascism is bad" is a conspiracy theory. I told it I believed that sincerely. At the end, it rated my belief 5 out of 5, meaning it was the most improbable scenario even for conspiracy theories.
posted by solotoro at 5:05 PM on September 12
I couldn't get past the captcha. Guess it's planar Earths for me from now on.
posted by credulous at 5:10 PM on September 12
posted by credulous at 5:10 PM on September 12
« Older "What about the train moving?" "Yeah. We'll see." | Fracking ban takes effect in Queensland's Channel... Newer »
...is that why it's here?
posted by NotMyselfRightNow at 2:12 PM on September 12 [24 favorites]