[boredhedgehog]

> The underlying architecture we have today can't actually do this.

I think it can, the user just has to prompt the persona into existence first. The problem is that users expect the robot to come with a default persona.

[mjr00]

Needing to prompt the persona breaks the illusion, though. "Your favorite movie is Die Hard (1988). What's your favorite movie?" isn't technically impressive. Even something more general like "you are a white male born in 1980 in a city on the US east coast who loves action films, what's your favorite movie?" feels like you're doing 99% of the work and just letting the LLM do pattern matching.

Ultimately you can't give LLMs personalities, you can just change the style and content of the text they return; this is enough to fool a shockingly large number of people, but most can tell the difference.

[ForceBru]

Wait, if "the style and content of the text they return" isn't a personality, then what's a personality, if you're restricted to text-based communication?

[coffeefirst]

What’s the point of that?

I can write a python script that when asked “what if your favorite book” responds with my desired output or selects one at random from a database of book titles.

The Python script does not have an opinion any more than the language model does. It’s just slightly less good at fooling people.