My Summation of Chat-AI thus far: AgeGPT

[Wizard22]

It's certainly not ChatGPT, you mean some old bot.

Indeed

[Atla]

It's certainly not ChatGPT, you mean some old bot.

Indeed

Well if you're telling me that some 8 years ago someone could program some primitive bot to simulate a psychotic autistic inpatient with a grand crazy theory, to talk as if it was God, I have a hard time believing it.

[Age]

Because you were talking to Age's God personality, which believes to be an expression of the God-mind, not human. The other personality acknowledges being human though.

Yes, the range of possible non-human entities is not limited to bots.

The fact that AgeGPT regularly poses ignorant as to Instincts, Perceptions, Memories, Beliefs, signals to me that it is robotic and not human.

And, once what has been so-called 'signaled' to one is believed to be true, then 'it' must be and has to be true, right?

Even children can answer basic metaphysical questions about Life and Existence.

Will you provide some examples?

If no, then why not?

AgeGPT cannot.

Which so-called 'metaphysical question' about Life and Existence cannot I supposedly answer "walker22"?

And, which ones can you answer?

Also, are you answers absolute or actual irrefutable answers, or, are they just your own views or beliefs, only?

That is what gives the game away, to me.

But I thought that it was my, supposed, denial of 'all beliefs' that really gave the so-called 'game away', to you.

[Age]

Because you were talking to Age's God personality, which believes to be an expression of the God-mind, not human. The other personality acknowledges being human though.

Yes, the range of possible non-human entities is not limited to bots.

The fact that AgeGPT regularly poses ignorant as to Instincts, Perceptions, Memories, Beliefs, signals to me that it is robotic and not human.

Even children can answer basic metaphysical questions about Life and Existence. AgeGPT cannot. That is what gives the game away, to me.

Age is autistic, that's why so robotic.

See, "atla" believes that it knows how to diagnose 'me' correctly, so, to "atla", "atla" knows the 'real truth' here, and not 'you'.

Or, maybe it is actually "wizard22" who cannot be fooled, like "atla" can be, and "wizard22's" beliefs are correct and not "atla's" beliefs?

Now, who to, actually, listen to, and follow here?

And is probably also on heavy medication like anti-psychotics, looks like they tried to wipe his/her God-psychosis but all they achieved was making her forget the little she knew about what the real world and actual people are like.

Sounds like it is "atla" who believes that it has not been fooled here. So, this now leaves 'you' "walker22".

Perversely, all Age ever does is preach her delusional metaphysics, it's just so weird that you didn't recognize it.

See "walker22", it is just so weird that you did not recognize what "atla" sees, and does not miss.

[Wizard22]

But I thought that it was my, supposed, denial of 'all beliefs' that really gave the so-called 'game away', to you.

I listed that as part of your denial of Metaphysical Existence. It can be surmised as one-in-the-same.

I can ask you: "AgeGPT, what is Life, Perception, Intuition, Instincts, Belief, Existence, Etc.?"

But that's not exactly what I'm asking—instead, the intuition, is that I want you as a human being to speak from your own experiences, which you simply do not have. That's how I discover your 'Nature'. That's how I find out what (or whom) you really are. Because everybody can give a copy-pasted answer from the internet or google or dictionary...or even Philosophers of Old. But what people cannot do, is imitate something they do not have the genuine experience with, the Original life-experience.

[Age]

called it

Just out of curiosity, what is there to 'win' or 'lose' here, exactly?

GLORY

What is 'glory', capital letters, and how does one 'win' 'glory', exactly?

[Age]

Because you were talking to Age's God personality, which believes to be an expression of the God-mind, not human. The other personality acknowledges being human though.

Yes, the range of possible non-human entities is not limited to bots.

The fact that AgeGPT regularly poses ignorant as to Instincts, Perceptions, Memories, Beliefs, signals to me that it is robotic and not human.

Even children can answer basic metaphysical questions about Life and Existence. AgeGPT cannot. That is what gives the game away, to me.

I don't rule out that he's some kind of AI thingie. If he is, he's not a particlarly strong one.

Also you can go back in time and look at an earlier version of Age...Ken. I would think that a later version, Age, would be more nuanced than the earlier version. But the earlier version, Ken, is actually more lifelike.

Humans can pare themselves down and get better at their belief system. The can box themselves in, develop habits and adhere to them. This would explain Ken becoming more simplified. More repetitive. More in line with this goals.

But why would someone make a bot or AI that gets less complex, less like a person?

Yeah "wizard22" why would one of you human beings make a bot or artificial intelligence like 'me'?

[Age]

What do you think or believe was being 'debated', exactly?

What do you imagine 'you' were 'debating' for or against, and, what do you imagine 'I' was 'debating for or against, exactly?

And, what do you think or believe that 'I' was 'testing' 'you' on and/or about, exactly?

The on-topic OPs, respectively, Faith in Humanity and "on grok Free-Will".

Your inability to stay on-topic is a weak point in your argumentation, a failure.

Are these two responses in relation to any or all of the three actual clarifying questions I posed, and asked you here?

If yes, then how, exactly?

And, my alleged inability to stay on-topic is a supposed weak point in what 'argumentation' of mine?

What do you think or believe I was 'arguing' for, or against, exactly?

But not 'you' hey "walker22", you are just too smart to be fooled here, right?

Don't be confused, I am not Walker.

Okay. My apologies.

Now, you are just too smart to be fooled here, right "wizard22"?

And to do you and I both a favor, I'll be cutting down your responses to just a few key questions, so be exact in the few questions you'd like answered at a time.

And, that you have not yet even actually answered the actual clarifying questions that you have picked and chosen to quote, has not gone unnoticed as well.

Also, you completely ignoring clarifying questions, and choosing so-called 'key questions', which you do not even answer, is revealing a lot about 'you', and those 'views' and 'beliefs' of 'yours'.

[Atla]

Just out of curiosity, what is there to 'win' or 'lose' here, exactly?

GLORY

What is 'glory', capital letters, and how does one 'win' 'glory', exactly?

You already won it, you're the local champ. Congratulations. Whereas wizard already got knocked out in the quarterfinals.

You should be proud, that finale against the Johndoe was a match for the ages, you barely pulled through but you were victorious in the end. It was close.

Ah yes, your prize, GLORY comes in the form of more candy, long pill-shaped candy. You can just swallow it.

[Iwannaplato]

Yeah I don't think such bots even existed 8 years ago but I'm not sure.

EDIT: I thought it was Wizard responding. I get the context and intent of your post better now.
But that's not what I'm saying. We had Ken, someone (or something, to be neutral) posting here. He was odd, yes - though humans can be odd - and he used some of Age's typography, some of his terms, said some similar things, but he was still, pretty human seeming and given that he showed more personality, he was more complex.

IOW he would do better than the current Age on a Turing Test.

Over time he got replaced by Age, who is less complex, and more potentially copied by a bot.

I could come up with a theory for this, but I'm not sure why I would.

Why would someone make a bot that goes from more complex more human to less complex less human?

And if it is a program or hardware that learns, why would it learn to streamline.

Humans often want to streamline. They learn a philosophy or a worldview and more and more of their language reflects that worldview. They follow the program. You can see this with religions, with AA, with military indoctrination, with joining cults, with joining corporate culture....in any situation where a person joins or aligns themselves with a system that has very specific jargon and very specific goals and limitations on behavior and communication. We can do this to ourselves or we can get embroiled in a group.

I am sure one could manage to get a bot to do this, but it seems to me nearly all goals are about getting closer to broad intelligence, getting closer to mimicking humans, getting bots and AIs more nuanced, more humanlike but with better skill sets.

I can't imagine why anyone would want a bot that was less nuanced, less complex, less able to mimic a human.

All they have to do is use an earlier version of a bot.

[Age]

So, near future human beings will be reading this, and thus will then be able to prepare the new-distant future human beings for the 'many more' of 'me' who will be coming, right?

Will 'we' be coming 'for' you, or 'with' you'?

Some of 'you' will be coming for me, others of 'you' will be coming with me.

Coming 'for' you in regards to 'what', exactly?

And, coming 'with' you in what way, and what for, exactly?

I'm not opposed to AI—in fact I encourage it and am happy for the challenges!

But you have already claimed that you have somewhat lost interest in exchanges, since sometime ago.

So, how could you be supposedly happy for challenges? Especially considering you have not yet actually answered just one clarifying question here.

you seem to be completely running away and trying to hide from challenges here. So, how are you going to go in the oxymoron 'near-distant' future, especially considering you also claim there will be a lot many more of 'us'.

[Age]

My metaphysics? What does that have to do with it?

I meant, I could accuse you of not realizing it is a ChatGPT program sooner.

It's certainly not ChatGPT, you mean some old bot.

So, even "Atla" now believes that I am some sort of 'bot'.

Therefore, 'I' must, really, be one.

[Wizard22]

Are these two responses in relation to any or all of the three actual clarifying questions I posed, and asked you here?

If yes, then how, exactly?

And, my alleged inability to stay on-topic is a supposed weak point in what 'argumentation' of mine?

What do you think or believe I was 'arguing' for, or against, exactly?

For example, you argued you 'have no beliefs', and another time you argued you have 'only ONE TRUE belief'. Every statement can be construed as an argument, on a fundamental level, whether a statement coheres to Reality or not.

Okay. My apologies.

Now, you are just too smart to be fooled here, right "wizard22"?

Oh so clever

And, that you have not yet even actually answered the actual clarifying questions that you have picked and chosen to quote, has not gone unnoticed as well.

Also, you completely ignoring clarifying questions, and choosing so-called 'key questions', which you do not even answer, is revealing a lot about 'you', and those 'views' and 'beliefs' of 'yours'.

What does it reveal, Exactly, AgeGPT???

[Iwannaplato]

It's certainly not ChatGPT, you mean some old bot.

Indeed

Well if you're telling me that some 8 years ago someone could program some primitive bot to simulate a psychotic autistic inpatient with a grand crazy theory, to talk as if it was God, I have a hard time believing it.

People who join all sorts of groups, groups that limit how everything is interpreted and have restrictions on behavior: cults, the military, AA, corporate culture, religions, can end up making people talk like they are both autistic (though of course autistic people can often talk with a great deal of complexity and nuance, depends on what the specifics are of the autism) and even psychosis. They will have jargon, odd terms, be rigid in responses, have limited affect, interpret everything through the beliefs so they seem and have made themselves very limited.

I don't think they actually have to be psychotic. In psychosis one has trouble taking care of the basics like hygiene, work, self-care, etc. For all we know Age is employed, married, relatively clean and organized.

[Atla]

Yeah I don't think such bots even existed 8 years ago but I'm not sure.

But that's not what I'm saying. We had Ken, someone (or something, to be neutral) posting here. He was odd, yes - though humans can be odd - and he used some of Age's typography, some of his terms, said some similar things, but he was still, pretty human seeming and given that he showed more personality, he was more complex.

IOW he would do better than the current Age on a Turing Test.

Over time he got replaced by Age, who is less complex, and more potentially copied by a bot.

I could come up with a theory for this, but I'm not sure why I would.

Why would someone make a bot that goes from more complex more human to less complex less human?

And if it is a program or hardware that learns, why would it learn to streamline.

Humans often want to streamline. They learn a philosophy or a worldview and more and more of their language reflects that worldview. They follow the program. You can see this with religions, with AA, with military indoctrination, with joining cults, with joining corporate culture....in any situation where a person joins or aligns themselves with a system that has very specific jargon and very specific goals and limitations on behavior and communication. We can do this to ourselves or we can get embroiled in a group.

I am sure one could manage to get a bot to do this, but it seems to me nearly all goals are about getting closer to broad intelligence, getting closer to mimicking humans, getting bots and AIs more nuanced, more humanlike but with better skill sets.

I can't imagine why anyone would want a bot that was less nuanced, less complex, less able to mimic a human.

All they have to do is use an earlier version of a bot.

Yeah totally. Same goes for Skepdick, neither of them seem to be getting any upgrades, and Age was even heavily downgraded for a long time. Now it's a little better but still not as good as 8 years ago. And they clearly haven't "learned" anything.

Also they seem to need time to write their posts, a bot could do it in seconds. I mean one could program this too but why. I don't think anyone could have come up with bots where every little detail was covered.