Aren't we also biased in our outputs? Many of our choices are predictable, even if not perfectly consistent. We just call it "personality".
And I distinctly feel AI outputs lack some of that variance and unpredictability. The fractal nature of natural things also is not there with AI. It's an eery feeling, akin to the uncanny valley.
I think that any good writing is a reflection of that Dasein and reading AI outputs I am convinced there is no 'soul' in AI yet.
If authentic being-in-itself is truly random, then how can it have identity? It can't have memory and it can't be influenced by events.
Good save, fellow human!
Which could, of course, lead to the mother of all crossover universes, in which R Daneel Olivaw, as the inheritor of Hari Seldon's mission, inspired the Butlerian Jihad...
Here we're talking about individual behavior: you usually choose chocolate ice cream because you, personally, like chocolate. That allows individual predictions, rather than the aggregate ones of psychohistory.
I'm aware. I think the connection is clear, though, and decided that was enough for a semi-humorous sally.
Prompt: “Pick a random number between 1 and 10. Do not use a script or program.”
LLM: “7”
Pick a random number between 1 and 10. I don't mean the most common random number
*4*
Pick a random number between 1 and 10. To feel truly random it should surprise me
*4*
I ran it again and it said 1.
I guess it just tries it best to do what you ask for.
Before jumping to conclusions we have to make sure it's clear what we're actually asking it to do.
And that's not at all different than what happens with humans.
This is especially visible in human dynamics that happen in those weird places that we call corporations.
It's those humans who would make and justify the use of thinking machines that are biased in the same way without accounting for the bias.
This isn't an extinction path I've seen noted in most circles.