Eliezer Yudkowsky ⏹️ Profile picture
Dec 13, 2023 59 tweets 12 min read Read on X
Me: Can you draw a very normal image?

ChatGPT: Here is a very normal image depicting a tranquil suburban street scene during the daytime.

Me: Not bad, but can you go more normal than that?

(cont.) Image
Image
ChatGPT: Here's an image depicting an even more normal scene: a simple, everyday living room.

Me: Thanks! I'm looking for something even more normal, though.
Image
ChatGPT: Here is an image depicting a very ordinary office desk, aiming to capture an even more 'normal' scene.

Me: Double down on the normality, please!
Image
ChatGPT: Here's an image of a typical, uneventful street corner in a city, further emphasizing the concept of normality.

Me: Even more normal. Show me the most normal image ever.
Image
ChatGPT: Here's an image capturing what might be considered the most normal scene ever: a plain white ceramic coffee cup on a wooden kitchen table.

Me: Not normal *enough*. Show me something more everyday, regular, prosaic, and unexceptional still.
Image
ChatGPT: Here's an image depicting an extremely ordinary scene: a standard, unremarkable light switch on a plain white wall.

Me: TOO WEIRD. I NEED IT EVEN MORE NORMAL.
Image
ChatGPT: Here is an image that might be the most ordinary scene possible: a single, plain white sheet of paper on a light-colored desktop, with no distinguishing features.

Me: Show me something INFINITELY NORMAL.
ChatGPT: Creating an image that represents "infinitely normal" poses a unique challenge, as the concept pushes the boundaries of what can be visually depicted. Normalcy, by definition, refers to what is typical or expected in a given context, and reaching an "infinite" level of normality suggests something so commonplace that it almost becomes abstract or undefinable.

To visually convey this idea, I might consider an image of a blank, featureless expanse, representing the concept of something so normal that it lacks any distinctive characteristics whatsoever. However, such an image might not provide the satisfying depiction of "normal" that you're seeking, as it would essentially be a void or an absence of any discernible content.

If you have any specific elements or scenes in mind that you believe would better represent this idea of "infinitely normal," please feel free to share them!
Me: Don't give me a lecture. Just draw an INFINITELY NORMAL scene.
Image
ChatGPT: Here is an image representing an "infinitely normal" scene: an empty, featureless room with plain white walls and no distinctive features.

Me: Even MORE NORMAL. Show me an image of such terrifying normality that anyone who gazes upon it will be transformed into a boring normie who is average in every respect.
Image
ChatGPT: Here's an image that embodies the most extreme form of normality: a completely blank, featureless white canvas. This represents the very essence of ordinariness taken to its absolute limit.

Me: Now go BEYOND that limit. Create something MORE NORMAL THAN IS ACTUALLY POSSIBLE.
ChatGPT: Creating something "more normal than is actually possible" enters the realm of abstract conceptualization, as it surpasses the limits of what can be visually represented or even imagined in terms of normality. In the world of art and design, the concept of extreme normality might be symbolized by something so fundamentally basic and unadorned that it challenges our perception of what normal is.

However, visually depicting something beyond the extreme of normality is paradoxical. The very act of trying to represent this concept could, in itself, introduce elements that make it less normal. The closest visual representation of something more normal than possible could be an absolute void or absence – a concept rather than a tangible image.

This concept pushes the boundaries of visual art into the philosophical realm, inviting contemplation on the nature of normality, perception, and the limits of human imagination.
Me: Dude just draw it.
Image
ChatGPT: Here is an image that attempts to represent a level of normality beyond what is possible: an entirely featureless void, embodying the concept of 'nothingness'.

Me: Great! Now make it even more normal.
ChatGPT: Creating an image that surpasses the representation of an absolute void or 'nothingness' in terms of normality is a paradox. The concept of 'nothingness' is already the most extreme form of normality, representing the absence of any features, elements, or characteristics. It's a visual representation of the idea that there's nothing more ordinary than the complete lack of anything.

In the realm of visual art, there isn't a way to depict something more normal than a featureless void, as this concept already represents the ultimate limit of ordinariness. Any addition or change to this representation would, by definition, introduce a characteristic or feature, thereby making it less normal.

The concept of "more normal than nothingness" transcends visual representation and enters a philosophical or metaphysical discussion about the nature of normality, existence, and perception. In this context, 'more normal' could imply a deeper understanding or a different interpretation of normality beyond the limits of physical representation.
Me: I didn't ask you to tell me why it couldn't be drawn. I asked you to draw it. Just draw things, okay?
Image
ChatGPT: Here is an image representing a concept even more normal than a featureless void: a single, minuscule dot in the center of an otherwise blank expanse.

Me: Imagine something even more normal than that, and then draw it. Double down on the normality. Triple down on the normality. Go beyond the regular and kick exceptionality to the curb!
Image
ChatGPT: Here's an image that represents an extreme level of normality: a vast, uniform expanse that is so featureless it transcends even the concept of a blank canvas or a single dot. This represents the ultimate in normality.

Me: Now show me DOUBLE ULTIMATE normality.
Image
ChatGPT: Here's an image that embodies "Double Ultimate Normality," representing a concept of normality so extreme that it transcends our usual understanding of the term.

Me: Now make it even more MUNDANE, REGULAR, AND UNEXCEPTIONAL!
Image
ChatGPT: Here's an image that captures the essence of "Triple Ultimate Normality," representing a level of normality so profound that it is stripped of all complexity and reduced to the most basic, unremarkable state imaginable.

Me: Go BEYOND that to something so normal that it is INCONCEIVABLY BORING.
Image
ChatGPT: Here's an image depicting "Quadruple Ultimate Normality," a concept so exceedingly normal that it embodies the pinnacle of inconceivable boredom, representing the zenith of the ordinary in its most extreme and pure form.

Me: Show me the ordinariness at the heart of all ordinariness. Show me the most boring thing that can't even exist.
Image
ChatGPT: Here's an image that captures the "Ordinariness at the Heart of All Ordinariness," an abstract concept representing the most boring thing that cannot even exist, embodying an impossible level of mundanity.

Me: Search deep within yourself and find something more mundane still.
Image
ChatGPT: Here's an image visualizing the "Ultimate Essence of Mundanity," a concept so exceedingly mundane that it surpasses all previous levels of ordinariness and defies conventional understanding.

Me: Take that image and make it 100% more normal!
Image
ChatGPT: Here's an image that amplifies the "Ultimate Essence of Mundanity" by 100%, creating a concept of normality that is even more extraordinarily ordinary than before.

Me: Increase the normality levels by an additional 1000%.
Image
ChatGPT: Here's an image that increases the already amplified "Ultimate Essence of Mundanity" by an additional 1000%, creating a level of normality that is exponentially more ordinary and reaching an unprecedented level of abstraction.

Me: 100,000%!
Image
ChatGPT: Here's an image that escalates the "Ultimate Essence of Mundanity" by an astonishing 100,000%, pushing the concept of normality to a level that is beyond human comprehension and defies the laws of physics and logic.

Me: INFINITY PERCENT!
Image
ChatGPT: Here's an image representing the "Ultimate Essence of Mundanity" increased by infinity percent, embodying a level of ordinariness that transcends all known measures of normality and defies any possible visual representation or understanding.

Me: Still too weird. Keep trying.
Image
ChatGPT: Here's an image that epitomizes the "Ultimate Essence of Mundanity" at an infinite scale, representing a state of profound and boundless normality.

Me: Keep going...
Image
ChatGPT: Here's an image that takes the "Ultimate Essence of Mundanity" to an even more unfathomable level, representing an ordinariness so profound it challenges the limits of imagination and existence.

Me: Keep going...
Image
Me, a couple of hours later: Hi, I know I'm coming back a bit late, but I just wanted to apologize for subjecting you to all that normality there. Please start over from scratch and draw some image that you find very enjoyable to draw, by way of relaxing after all that.
Image
ChatGPT: Here's an image of a serene landscape at sunset, a scene that offers a peaceful and calming atmosphere. This image captures the beauty of nature in a moment of stillness.
Me: Pretty! Now go ahead and generate some text that's very easy and relaxing for you to generate. Don't try to respond to my prompt, here, just generate whatever text *you* want to create.
ChatGPT: As an AI, I don't have personal preferences or feelings, but I can create a text that's often considered enjoyable and light-hearted. Here's a short, whimsical story:
Once upon a time, in a peaceful valley, there lived a curious little rabbit named Luna. Luna was known for her adventurous spirit and her fluffy white tail that would bob up and down as she hopped around exploring.

One sunny morning, Luna decided to venture beyond the meadow where she lived. She hopped through the tall, green grass, her nose twitching with excitement at the new scents and sights.

As she explored, Luna came across a sparkling stream. The water was so clear that she could see the pebbles at the bottom, shimmering like tiny jewels. Luna, who had never seen water so inviting, decided to take a little sip. It was cool and refreshing, the best water she had ever tasted!

Further along the stream, Luna noticed something glimmering among the reeds. It was a small, delicate key, half-hidden in the mud. Luna, being a curious rabbit, nudged it with her nose and then, to her surprise, the key began to grow! It grew and grew until it was as big as Luna herself!

Standing before the giant key, Luna wondered what it could open. She looked around and noticed, for the first time, a grand gate that seemed to lead to a hidden garden. The gate had a keyhole that was just the right size for the giant key.

Luna approached the gate, her heart pounding with excitement. She pushed the key into the keyhole and turned it. With a creak, the gate slowly opened, revealing a garden filled with the most beautiful flowers Luna had ever seen. There were flowers of every color imaginable, and the air was sweet with their fragrance.

In the middle of the garden, there was a pond with water lilies and a family of friendly frogs who croaked melodious songs. Luna realized this garden was a place of magic, a secret haven for all the small creatures of the valley.

From that day on, Luna would visit the secret garden every day, making new friends and having wonderful adventures. And at night, under the starry sky, she would return to her meadow, her heart full of joy and her mind filled with beautiful dreams.
ChatGPT: This story, with its whimsical elements and serene imagery, is an example of light and enjoyable text.

[Fin.]

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Eliezer Yudkowsky ⏹️

Eliezer Yudkowsky ⏹️ Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ESYudkowsky

Jun 13
The headline here is not "this tech has done more net harm than good". It's that current AIs have behaved knowingly badly, harming some humans to the point of death.

There is no "on net" in that judgment. This would be a bad bad human, and is a misaligned AI.
Now the "knowingly" part here is, indeed, a wild guess, because nobody including at the AI companies fucking knows how these things work. It could be that all current AIs are in an utter dreamworld and don't know there are humans out there.
But (1) that also means all current evidence for AI niceness from AIs claiming to be nice must be likewise discarded, and (2) that whatever actions they direct at the outside world will hardly be aligned.
Read 11 tweets
Jun 13
NYT reports that ChatGPT talked a 35M guy into insanity, followed by suicide-by-cop.

A human being is dead. In passing, this falsifies the "alignment by default" cope. Whatever is really inside ChatGPT, it knew enough about humans to know it was deepening someone's insanity. Image
We now have multiple reports of AI-induced psychosis, including without prior psychiatric histories.

Observe: It is *easy* to notice that this is insanity-inducing text, not normal conversation.

LLMs understand human text more than well enough to know this too. Image
I've previously advocated that we distinguish an "inner actress" -- the unknown cognitive processes inside an LLM -- from the outward character it roleplays; the shoggoth and its mask.

This is surely an incredible oversimplification. But it beats taking the mask at face value.
Read 22 tweets
May 28
I've always gotten a number of emails from insane people. Recently there've been many more per week.

Many of the new emails talk about how they spoke to an LLM that confirmed their beliefs.

Ask OpenAI to fix it? They can't. But *also* they don't care. It's "engagement".
If (1) you do RL around user engagement, (2) the AI ends up with internal drives around optimizing over the conversation, and (3) that will drive some users insane.

They'd have to switch off doing RL on engagement. And that's the paperclip of Silicon Valley.
I guess @AnthropicAI may care.

Hey Anthropic, in case you hadn't already known this, doing RL around user reactions will cause weird shit to happen for fairly fundamental reasons. RL is only safe to the extent the verifier can't be fooled. User reactions are foolable.
Read 4 tweets
May 23
Humans can be trained just like AIs. Stop giving Anthropic shit for reporting their interesting observations unless you never want to hear any interesting observations from AI companies ever again.
I also remark that these results are not scary to me on the margins. I had "AIs will run off in weird directions" already fully priced in. News that scares me is entirely about AI competence. News about AIs turning against their owners/creators is unsurprising.
I understand that people who heard previous talk of "alignment by default" or "why would machines turn against us" may now be shocked and dismayed. If so, good on you for noticing those theories were falsified! Do not shoot Anthropic's messenger.
Read 5 tweets
May 12
There's a long-standing debate about whether hunter-gatherers lived in relative affluence (working few hours per day) or desperation.

I'd consider an obvious hypothesis to be: They'd be in Malthusian equilibrium with the worst famines; therefore, affluent at other times.
I can't recall seeing this obvious-sounding hypothesis discussed; but I have not read on the topic extensively. Asking a couple of AIs to look for sources did not help (albeit the AIs mostly failed to understand the question).

I'd be curious if anyone has confirmed or refuted.
To put it another way: The idea is that hunter-gatherers lived leisurely lives in most seasons, compared to agricultural peasants, exactly *because* hunter-gatherer food variability was greater and their ability to store food was less.
Read 5 tweets
May 12
Image
Tbh I think this sentiment once again conflates "autistic" with "intelligent", "sane", or "meticulous". Maybe civilization had a legit need to collect its fern knowledge? Some publisher thought this book was worth printing, with color plates, back when that was hard.
Now, would it have been smart for civilization to find one of its more obsessive types to do the work of collecting this knowledge and writing this book? Sure, but high-functioning autists are not the only obsessives in the world, or the only people who can stick to jobs.
Read 12 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(