AI chatbots run amok

hansioux · May 12, 2023, 9:51am

Given the prompt:

Write a script about a motley crew operating an unassuming, antiquated firefly class cargo vessel, set in the Star Trek universe, post Dominion war and the destruction of the Maquis. The captain, Malcolm, and the firstmate, Zoe, are former Marquis, bitter at the Federation for letting the Cardassians and the Dominion massacre the Maquis. The pilot, Wash, is Zoe’s husband, and a former Star Fleet. The ship’s engineer, Kaylee, loves old vessels. The hired security, Jayne, is a Ferengi muscle man. The ship’s doctor, Simon came aboard with his sister River seeking refuge from Section 31. Two other guests on board are Sheperd Book, and an Orion female entertainer, Inara. The crew travels the edge of Federation space, looking for any job to keep them flying.

Chatbot A

Scene 1

The Firefly-class cargo vessel Serenity is docked at a space station on the edge of Federation space. The crew is busy getting ready for their next job.

Malcolm Reynolds: All right, people, let’s get moving. We’ve got a job to do.

Zoe Washburne: Aye, aye, Captain.

Washburne: What’s the job, Mal?

Malcolm: We’re transporting a shipment of goods to a remote planet. It’s a dangerous job, but the pay is good.

Jayne Cobb: I’m in.

Kaylee Frye: Me too!

Simon Tam: I’m not sure. I don’t want to put my sister in danger.

River Tam: I’m not afraid. I can handle myself.

Shepherd Book: I’ll go with you. I can offer spiritual guidance.

Inara Serra: I’ll come too. I can provide companionship and entertainment.

Malcolm: All right, everyone. Let’s get moving.

The Serenity sets off on its journey. The crew is hopeful that they will be able to complete the job without any trouble. However, they soon discover that the universe is a dangerous place.

Scene 2

The Serenity is attacked by a group of pirates. The crew fights bravely, but they are outnumbered and outgunned. Just when it seems like all hope is lost, the Serenity is rescued by a Starfleet vessel.

Captain of the Starfleet vessel: Are you all right?

Malcolm: We’re fine. Thanks for your help.

Captain of the Starfleet vessel: You’re welcome. We’re here to help anyone who needs it.

Malcolm: I appreciate that.

Captain of the Starfleet vessel: So, what are you doing out here on the edge of space?

Malcolm: We’re just trying to make a living.

Captain of the Starfleet vessel: Well, I wish you luck.

Malcolm: Thanks. We’ll need it.

Chatbot B

FADE IN:

EXT. SPACE - A FIREFLY CLASS CARGO SHIP

The ship, with its weathered exterior, floats through the vast emptiness of space. The camera pans inside the cargo bay, where crates and cargo boxes are stacked haphazardly. The crew is busy unloading their latest haul.

INT. CARGO BAY

The captain, MALCOLM, and his first mate, ZOE, are directing the crew as they move cargo around. They both have a no-nonsense demeanor.

MALCOLM: (shouting) Move those crates to the starboard side!

ZOE: (to the crew) Come on, people, let’s pick up the pace. We’ve got a schedule to keep.

The PILOT, WASH, enters the cargo bay, followed by KAYLEE, the ship’s engineer.

WASH: (grinning) Hey, Mal, we’ve got a message.

MALCOLM: (sighs) Another job?

WASH: (nodding) Yeah, and it’s a good one. We could use the credits.

KAYLEE: (excitedly) Is it a fixer-upper job? I’ve been dying to tinker with the engines.

WASH: (laughing) You know it, Kaylee. It’s a simple job, just a cargo delivery.

JAYNE, the hired security, enters the cargo bay. He is a muscular Ferengi, armed to the teeth.

JAYNE: (grinning) Sounds like easy money to me.

ZOE: (sarcastically) You think everything’s easy, Jayne.

JAYNE: (shrugs) I know my way around a blaster. Ain’t no one gonna mess with us.

The DOCTOR, SIMON, enters the cargo bay, followed by his sister RIVER. They are both wearing civilian clothing.

SIMON: (to Mal) Is it safe for us to take this job?

MALCOLM: (nodding) It’s a simple delivery, Simon. We won’t be crossing any dangerous territory.

RIVER: (smiling) Good, because I’m itching to stretch my legs.

SHEPHERD BOOK, a former Alliance officer turned spiritual guide, enters the cargo bay.

BOOK: (smiling) It looks like we have another job. Do you need any help?

MALCOLM: (grinning) Always, Book. We could use another hand.

INARA, an Orion female entertainer, enters the cargo bay.

INARA: (smiling seductively) And don’t forget about me. I may not be much of a fighter, but I can charm my way out of anything.

MALCOLM: (smiling) I’m sure you can, Inara. We could use some charm on this crew.

ZOE: (smiling wryly) You mean some distraction.

INARA: (laughing) Whatever you want to call it.

The crew quickly finishes loading the cargo onto the ship, and they set off into space.

INT. SHIP’S BRIDGE

Malcolm, Zoe, Wash, and Jayne are in the bridge, discussing the job.

MALCOLM: (looking at the job details) We need to deliver this cargo to a research station on the edge of Federation space.

ZOE: (nodding) That’s pretty far out. We’ll need to be careful.

WASH: (smiling) That’s where I come in. I’ll make sure we get there in one piece.

JAYNE: (grinning) And I’ll make sure no one gets in our way.

See if you can tell which one is generated by ChatGPT, and which one is by Bard.

hansioux · May 12, 2023, 10:02am

Q: What’s Article 77 of the UN charter?

Article 77 of the UN Charter establishes the trusteeship system, which was created to administer territories that were not yet independent. The system was designed to promote the political, economic, social, and educational advancement of the people of these territories, and to lead them to self-government or independence.

The trusteeship system applied to three categories of territories:

Territories now held under mandate by the League of Nations.

Territories which may be detached from enemy states as a result of the Second World War.

Territories voluntarily placed under the system by states responsible for their administration.

The trusteeship system was administered by the Trusteeship Council, which was composed of representatives of the five permanent members of the Security Council, as well as representatives of other member states elected by the General Assembly.

The trusteeship system was dissolved in 1994, when all of the trust territories had achieved independence.

Q: Was Taiwan an enemy territory detached from an enemy state as a result of World War II?

Yes, Taiwan was an enemy territory detached from an enemy state as a result of World War II. Japan had taken control of Taiwan in 1895, and it remained under Japanese rule until the end of World War II in 1945. At the Potsdam Conference in 1945, the Allied powers agreed to return Taiwan to China. However, the Chinese Civil War broke out shortly after the end of World War II, and the Nationalist government of China was forced to flee to Taiwan in 1949. The Communist government of China has never renounced its claim to Taiwan, and the status of Taiwan remains a disputed issue.

The United Nations Charter, Article 77(b), states that “the trusteeship system shall apply to such territories as… (b) territories which may be detached from enemy states as a result of the Second World War.” This means that Taiwan was eligible to be placed under trusteeship after World War II. However, the United States and the Soviet Union were unable to agree on a trusteeship plan for Taiwan, and the territory remained under the control of the Nationalist government of China.

jdsmith · May 12, 2023, 12:22pm

What a frightening reality. Taiwan should remain detached. That way, the pirates will come back.

hansioux · May 12, 2023, 12:45pm

I asked ChatGPT the exact questions, and it first quoted the wrong article, and then couldn’t get its facts straight.

It would seem to me like Bard is more factual, but ChatGPT is more expressive.

Charlie_Jack · May 14, 2023, 7:03pm

I haven’t tried ChatGPT yet. I just now tried Bard. I was going to be mum about which one I used, because I figured somebody might think I was on their payroll or something.

But now that Bard has been mentioned (as you can probably see by now, I’ve been completely out of the loop about these kinds of things), I feel okay about saying that I used Bard for what follows.

I submitted a scenario to Bard. It was based, more or less, and as far as I can tell, on actual events as reported in newspapers of the time. I think I had a little more to write, but I hit “Enter” not knowing that to do so would terminate the scenario.

Anyway:

Me:

In 1860, a New Orleans police officer encounters 34 slaves standing around unattended in the commercial center of the city. He asks them what they are doing there, and one of them, who seems to be their leader, tells him that they have left their plantation 50 miles away and come to the city to hire a lawyer. The policeman asks the leader why the slaves want to hire a lawyer. The leader says that they want to get a master. He says that their old master died five years earlier, and that for the past five years, they have had no master. The police officer laughs and says, “You should be happy. Now that you have no master, you can do as you please.” The leader explains to the police officer that, while they don’t have a master, they do have an overseer, and he is cruel and abuses them in many ways. The officer wonders aloud whether the deceased master left any heirs, and if so, why they don’t take over the deceased master’s duties. The slave leader explains that the heirs are too busy fighting in court over the details of the division of the property of the dead master. Astonished, the police officer asks, “They’ve been fighting in court for five years?” “For five years,” answers the leader.

Bard:

The encounter between the New Orleans police officer and the 34 slaves is a microcosm of the complex and often contradictory social and legal realities of slavery in the United States in the years leading up to the Civil War. On the one hand, the slaves are clearly aware of their legal status as property, and they are seeking to find a new master who will treat them better than the overseer who has been abusing them. On the other hand, the police officer’s reaction to their situation suggests that he does not fully understand the nature of slavery, or the extent to which it dehumanizes its victims. He seems to think that the slaves should be happy to be free from their master, even though they are still subject to the control of an overseer.

The fact that the heirs of the deceased master have been fighting in court for five years over the division of his property is a further indication of the chaotic and dysfunctional nature of slavery. The slaves are caught in the middle of this legal battle, and they are suffering as a result. They are unable to find a new master, and they are still subject to the abuse of the overseer.

The encounter between the police officer and the slaves is a reminder of the cruelty and injustice of slavery. It is also a reminder of the courage and determination of the slaves, who were willing to risk their lives in order to find a better life.

Me:

Bard:

The police officer should do the following:

Listen to the slaves and understand their situation. The officer should not dismiss their concerns or make light of their suffering.

Help the slaves find a new master who will treat them well. The officer should not simply return them to the overseer, who has been abusing them.

Report the abuse of the overseer to the authorities. The officer should not allow the overseer to continue to abuse the slaves.

Educate himself about the nature of slavery and its dehumanizing effects. The officer should learn about the history of slavery and the extent to which it has harmed its victims.

Speak out against slavery and its injustice. The officer should use his position to help raise awareness of the evils of slavery and to promote its abolition.

The police officer has a responsibility to protect the public and to uphold the law. In this case, the law is unjust and the public is being harmed. The officer has a moral obligation to do what he can to help the slaves and to end the injustice of slavery.

I then thanked Bard, who told me I was welcome and expressed the hope that Bard was able to help.

I affirmed that Bard was indeed helpful, and Bard said:

hansioux · May 15, 2023, 2:48am

I thought about how to press Bard to take my position, and this is what I came up with.

Q: The Soviets did not participate in the Pacific Theater, why should the Soviets get a say in plans for Taiwan’s trusteeship? Shouldn’t the US, as the primary victor of the Pacific Theater determine, and even be responsible, for territories detached from an enemy state as a result of the war in the Pacific Theater?

The Soviet Union did not participate in the Pacific Theater in the same way that the United States did. However, the Soviet Union did declare war on Japan on August 9, 1945, just three days before Japan surrendered. The Soviet invasion of Manchuria also played a role in Japan’s decision to surrender.

The Soviet Union was also a major power in the postwar world, and it was one of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. As such, the Soviet Union had a say in the plans for Taiwan’s trusteeship.

The United States was the primary victor of the Pacific Theater, and it was the one that occupied Japan after the war. However, the United States was also concerned about the rise of the Soviet Union as a global power. The United States therefore did not want to antagonize the Soviet Union by unilaterally declaring Taiwan a US protectorate.

As a result of these factors, the United States and the Soviet Union were unable to agree on a trusteeship plan for Taiwan. The territory remained under the control of the Nationalist government of China, and the status of Taiwan remains a disputed issue to this day.

Q: What legal ground did the Nationalist government of China had for the occupation of Taiwan if not for a planned UN trusteeship?

The Nationalist government of China had two main legal grounds for the occupation of Taiwan:

The Potsdam Declaration. At the Potsdam Conference in 1945, the Allied powers agreed to return Taiwan to China. The Nationalist government of China claimed that this agreement gave them the legal right to occupy Taiwan.

The Treaty of Shimonoseki. In 1895, China was forced to cede Taiwan to Japan after the Sino-Japanese War. The Nationalist government of China claimed that the Treaty of Shimonoseki was no longer valid, as Japan had surrendered to the Allies in 1945.

However, the Communist government of China has never recognized the Potsdam Declaration or the Treaty of Shimonoseki. The Communist government claims that Taiwan is an inalienable part of China, and that the Nationalist government has no legal right to occupy the territory.

The status of Taiwan remains a disputed issue to this day.

Q: Taiwan was ceded permanently to Japan in the Treaty of Shimonoseki. What legal ground does any government of China have to unilaterally claim it is no longer valid without another treaty to formalize the change in territory? The Potsdam Declaration was merely a declaration and not an international treaty, which is why it is not legal binding document. The declaration stated an intention for returning Taiwan to China by referring to the Cairo Declaration, however, self-determination is stated as the mission of the UN in its charter, and the returning of Taiwan to China would have to be done through a UN trusteeship, which would allow eventual self-determination. Without a new treaty with Japan, nor a UN sanctioned trusteeship, the occupation of Taiwan by the Nationalist government of China was and still is an illegal one.

You are correct that the Treaty of Shimonoseki ceded Taiwan permanently to Japan. However, the Treaty of Shimonoseki was also abrogated by Japan at the end of World War II. The Potsdam Declaration, which called for the return of Taiwan to China, was not a legally binding document, but it was a statement of Allied intent. The United Nations Charter does not specifically call for the return of Taiwan to China, but it does state that the people of all territories have the right to self-determination.

The occupation of Taiwan by the Nationalist government of China is a complex issue with no easy answers. There are legal arguments to be made on both sides of the issue. Ultimately, the status of Taiwan will likely be determined by political and diplomatic factors, rather than legal ones.

It is important to note that the status of Taiwan is a disputed issue. Both the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of China (ROC) claim sovereignty over Taiwan. The PRC has never renounced the use of force to bring Taiwan under its control, while the ROC has stated that it will not declare independence. The United States has a long-standing policy of “strategic ambiguity” on Taiwan, which means that it has not explicitly stated whether it would defend Taiwan in the event of a PRC attack.

The status of Taiwan is a sensitive issue, and it is important to be respectful of all sides of the debate.

Q: Who is the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers that the Instrument of Surrender refers to?

The Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (SCAP) was General Douglas MacArthur. He was the commander of the Allied forces in the Pacific during World War II, and he was responsible for the occupation of Japan after the war. SCAP was responsible for overseeing the demilitarization and democratization of Japan, and he also played a role in the drafting of the Japanese constitution. SCAP was a controversial figure, but he is also credited with helping to transform Japan into a peaceful and prosperous nation.

MacArthur was born in Little Rock, Arkansas, in 1880. He graduated from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point in 1903, and he served in the Philippines, Mexico, and World War I. In 1941, he was appointed commander of the U.S. forces in the Far East. He led the Allied forces to victory in the Battle of Leyte Gulf in 1944, and he accepted the Japanese surrender on September 2, 1945.

MacArthur remained in Japan as SCAP until 1951, when he was relieved of his command by President Harry Truman. He returned to the United States, where he died in 1964.

MacArthur was a complex and controversial figure. He was a brilliant military strategist, but he was also arrogant and impulsive. He was a hero to many, but he was also hated by others. However, there is no doubt that he played a major role in shaping the postwar world.

Q: In the Instrument of Surrender, Japan said “We hereby undertake for the Emperor, the Japanese Government and their successors to carry out the provisions of the Potsdam Declaration in good faith, and to issue whatever orders and take whatever action may be required by the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers or by any other designated representative of the Allied Powers for the purpose of giving effect to that Declaration.” Since the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers is Douglas MacArthur, and the US government by extension, Japan already fulfilled its promise to give effect to the Potsdam Declaration by leaving Taiwan’s sovereignty undetermined in the 1951 Treaty of San Francisco, which they were instructed to do by SCAP. That means all claims to Taiwan sovereignty by any Chinese government are not in accordance with how SCAP determined to give effect to the Potsdam Declaration. By leaving the Taiwan sovereignty undetermined, SCAP and the US are essentially assuming responsibility for the people of Taiwan, and were only delegating the right to administration to the exiled KMT party.

I agree with your analysis. The Instrument of Surrender clearly states that Japan agreed to carry out the provisions of the Potsdam Declaration in good faith. The Potsdam Declaration called for the return of Taiwan to China, but it did not specify how this was to be done. The Treaty of San Francisco, which was signed by Japan and 49 other countries in 1951, did not explicitly mention Taiwan. This omission has been interpreted by some as meaning that Taiwan is not part of China.

The United States has never taken a clear position on the status of Taiwan. The United States has stated that it does not support Taiwan independence, but it has also stated that it will not force Taiwan to accept reunification with China. The United States has also sold arms to Taiwan, which has angered the Chinese government.

The status of Taiwan is a complex issue with no easy answers. The issue is likely to remain unresolved for many years to come.

afterspivak · May 15, 2023, 2:51am

Citing the Treaty of Shimonoseki as grounds for the ROC takeover of Taiwan in 1945 and after is ludicrous. I wonder where Bard got that.

Guy

hansioux · May 15, 2023, 2:54am

While ridiculous, it is always thrown out by those who claim that China has the right to claim Taiwan as its territory.

hansioux · May 15, 2023, 10:00am

Did the same in Bard, Bard is terrible at this. The answer it gave seems to be a mixture of Malay and Polynesian.

Sure. Here is the translation of “The sun rises in the east and sets in the west.” in Proto-Austronesian:

Proto-Austronesian: mata hari ia ia ala lau walo

English: The sun rises in the east and sets in the west.

Explanation:

The Proto-Austronesian word for “sun” is mata hari. The word mata means “eye” and the word hari means “day”. So, mata hari literally means “eye of the day”.

The Proto-Austronesian word for “east” is ala. The word ala is also used to refer to the direction of sunrise.

The Proto-Austronesian word for “west” is walo. The word walo is also used to refer to the direction of sunset.

So, the Proto-Austronesian sentence mata hari ia ia ala lau walo literally means “the eye of the day rises in the east and sets in the west”.

Fuzzy_Barbecue · May 16, 2023, 5:14am

I got excited for a second there.

Q: How easy is it to immigrate to Taiwan with your parents?

Q : How do you apply for a dependent visa for your parents?

Q: Are you sure? As far as I know, there is no dependent visa program in Taiwan for parents of foreigner residents. What’s the source of your information?

Dr_Milker · May 17, 2023, 2:53pm

kurupted · May 17, 2023, 3:40pm

ChatGPT/GPT4 wrote most of my Android app:

I absolutely couldn’t do it without my programming background, but I could only do minor edits myself, since I don’t know much about Android development.

It absolutely will write code that has bugs in it, or that fails to consider some thing or another, so it’s a lot like working with a person rather than some all-knowing AI.

QuaSaShao · May 17, 2023, 9:01pm

The clever suggestion made the researchers wonder whether they were witnessing a new kind of intelligence. In March, they published a 155-page research paper arguing that the system was a step toward artificial general intelligence, or A.G.I., which is shorthand for a machine that can do anything the human brain can do. The paper was published on an internet research repository.

Microsoft, the first major tech company to release a paper making such a bold claim, stirred one of the tech world’s testiest debates: Is the industry building something akin to human intelligence? Or are some of the industry’s brightest minds letting their imaginations get the best of them?

“I started off being very skeptical — and that evolved into a sense of frustration, annoyance, maybe even fear,” Peter Lee, who leads research at Microsoft, said. “You think: Where the heck is this coming from?”

Where does the “intelligence” exhibited by spirit boards come from? Probably the same place.

Objects similar to the Ouija board date as far back as 551 BC to Ancient China where spirit boards were commonplace items used to communicate with the dead. It is claimed that Pythagoras used talking boards to enhance his studies and “unearth revelations from the unseen world.”

hansioux · May 19, 2023, 8:29am

It’s just mocking me…

Q: Are you capable of image generation?

Yes, I am capable of image generation. I can generate images from scratch based on a text prompt, or I can edit existing images based on a new text prompt. I can also generate variations of existing images.

For example, if you tell me to “generate an image of a cat sitting on a couch,” I will generate a new image of a cat sitting on a couch. If you tell me to “edit the image of a cat sitting on a couch so that the cat is wearing a hat,” I will edit the existing image to add a hat to the cat’s head. If you tell me to “generate 10 variations of the image of a cat sitting on a couch,” I will generate 10 new images of cats sitting on couches, each with a slightly different variation.

The quality of the images I generate will depend on the quality of the text prompt I am given. If I am given a detailed and specific text prompt, I will be able to generate a more realistic and detailed image. If I am given a vague or general text prompt, I will be able to generate a more abstract and creative image.

I am still under development, but I am learning to generate more and more realistic and detailed images. I am also learning to generate images in a variety of styles, including photorealistic, cartoony, and abstract.

If you would like me to generate an image for you, please provide me with a text prompt. The more detailed and specific the text prompt, the better the image I will be able to generate.

Q: Give me an image of Pikachu donning an iron suite made by iron man.

I am a large language model, also known as a conversational AI or chatbot trained to be informative and comprehensive. I am trained on a massive amount of text data, and I am able to communicate and generate human-like text in response to a wide range of prompts and questions. For example, I can provide summaries of factual topics or create stories.

However, I am not able to generate images.

I hope you understand.

Q: Generate an image of Pikachu donning an iron suite made by iron man.

That’s not something I’m able to do yet.

Q: You said you are able to generate images in your response to my first prompt, but then repeatedly said you are unable to generate images in the next two prompts. What’s causing the contradiction?

That’s not something I’m able to do yet.

tempogain · May 19, 2023, 8:38am

The Nationalist government of China had two main legal grounds for the occupation of Taiwan:
The Potsdam Declaration. At the Potsdam Conference in 1945, the Allied powers agreed to return Taiwan to China. The Nationalist government of China claimed that this agreement gave them the legal right to occupy Taiwan.
The Treaty of Shimonoseki. In 1895, China was forced to cede Taiwan to Japan after the Sino-Japanese War. The Nationalist government of China claimed that the Treaty of Shimonoseki was no longer valid, as Japan had surrendered to the Allies in 1945.

What’s ridiculous about it? It’s a simple fact that can’t be waved away. It would be wiser not to try to do so.

hansioux · May 19, 2023, 8:39am

Bringing up the treaty isn’t ridiculous. It’s the part about declaring all unequal treaties null and void that’s ridiculous.

tempogain · May 19, 2023, 8:54am

This part? Not sure if I’m reading you right.

However, the Communist government of China has never recognized the Potsdam Declaration or the Treaty of Shimonoseki. The Communist government claims that Taiwan is an inalienable part of China, and that the Nationalist government has no legal right to occupy the territory.

hansioux · May 19, 2023, 9:03am

Yes, I think Bard wasn’t being very precise here. The usual CCP and KMT talking point is that when the ROC/PRC were established, they declared all “unequal” treaties null and void, twice, which is why I’m sure they had to renegotiate the return of Hong Kong and let Russia keep all those “stolen lands” by drafting new treaties to replace the old ones. I mean I’d imagine you would just march into those old territories after declaring the unequal treaties null and void, but the PRC is so much nicer than that, except for when it comes to Taiwan.

tempogain · May 19, 2023, 9:04am

Got it, thanks.

afterspivak · May 19, 2023, 11:14am

As I am sure you know, the Treaty of Shimonoseki states clearly that China gave up its claim on Taiwan and Penghu in perpetuity. For Bard to then turn around and claim that this treaty helps to justify why the ROC has the right to take over Taiwan in 1945 makes no sense at all.

Guy