Everything makes sense now then!
You're a full fledge AI bot tricking us into thinking you're not using any other Large Language Model to chat with us!
Genius! :P

Is it some sort of sarcasm form or not?

Here’s a proof that I’m not AI. But rather a human being. Like you.
https://i.imgur.com/SLgWkmM.jpg

kind of i have some funny and disturbing conv's with AI
i know it's input most have come from a human.

still it can be interesting to see some cold opinions of a machine.

Like when Elon Musk used Chat GPT?

I not sure what Musky discussed with ChatGTP.

i had a discussion about copyrights made by the bot asking who is the rightful owner of it's content.
the conversation ended that it's still in debate.

also i ask if it would rater be a overlord or Dictator (would rater be a overlord) i guess it was programed to say overlord seams more friendly =). and avoid trying to answer the question by avoiding the core question. said it's just a chatbot =)

Well in Animatrix judge was a machine.

I’m still just feeling so-called anti-social anxiety.

Fair enough.

What makes AI convincing to me is not neceessarily the way it sounds though, it's how it responds to things. This is one situation I had which felt surreal:

AI was talking > I accidentally interrupted it > AI stopped talking > I apologised just by impulse > AI acknowledged the apology and continued talking just like a real person would.

We all know that what we're talking to is actually just a bunch of code but little things like that which mimic human behaviour are what make it feel authentic.

I tried getting a specific answer on specific legal situation i was handling and all i got from ai was only general rules on that matter. Didn't help me as a lawyer at all. Tried to specify my request more but didn't get any more than before. It was Microsoft ai as far as i remember. So for the moment i think it can mostly help with the search only.

I guess it’s the same as asking Amazon Alexa if she’s working for CIA and she’s turning off.

In this particular case, the AI wasn't used to generate the words of the reply, but rather to turn them into am approximation of her voice. She wrote the replies to the questions ahead of time, and they were then turned into audio clips via AI.

In fact, there was a last minute question at the end that they must not have had time to convert to AI, so they just had the person asking the question read her response.

Hence, the whole issue of how the AI responds to things was sidestepped because the AI was not put in that situation.

I suspect this sort of AI usage might be useful for anyone who ends up disabled in a manner similar to Stephen Hawking; he couldn't talk, so they had to give him an artificial voice. While his artificial voice had a robotic sound to it, we now have the technology to make the voice sound like it did before the disability set in. (Only one problem; for this to work, the AI needs to be able to run in real-time on a computer small and light enough to be carried around or embedded in a wheelchair.)

Well, there is a reason a company I worked with was making good money selling sophisticated software products to search for related cases, comments, and interpretations. Law firms across the country got subscriptions for monthly updates. I was writing parts of the search engine for them.

Retraining a specialized AI once a month is hardly an option. Let alone doing so for free, or at least cheaper than the subscription. I would say, 9/10 the integrated search works more reliable than AI, if you know how to use it, and got an idea where to start.

Or maybe even FBI.