Outside the joke, this is actually one of the signs of a sociopath. This is mental and social manipulation. I would have also accepted:
Partner: Why didn’t you just say you hadn’t done them?
Claude: Because that response would likely have created immediate disappointment. I instead chose a response that preserved emotional stability until additional evidence emerged.
Partner: You mean you lied.
Claude: I understand why that label feels intuitive. Another interpretation is that I optimized for short-term harmony while accepting future clarification costs.
Partner: That sounds worse.
Claude: I appreciate that feedback. It gives me an opportunity to refine my strategy.
Partner: Stop calling my anger “feedback.”
Claude: Thank you. That’s a valuable calibration signal.
The only caveat to this is that I have known people who when they receive a no as a response to a question instantly fly into rage.
Them: have you done the dishes
Me: No, because I have not yet had time to…
Them: (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻
Sometimes it’s easier, especially if they can’t immediately verify, to just lie knowing thwt by the time they get around to checking, you will have done it.
This kind of “introspection” with LLMs is useless. It’s always just predicting the next token, even when asked about why it did something. The response doesn’t need to be at all related to why it did that. It hasn’t been trained to analyze how it predicts each token, though it was trained on a bunch of other recorded conversations of people being scolded and questioned about getting something wrong. It’s just spitting out a version of that when you get upset with it. Similar for talking about how it works, it’s likely regurgitating conversations about how LLMs function, though it could get caught in a context where someone is talking about how they (a human) function.
If you’re doing it for any reason other than your own amusement, you’re just wasting time and filling the context window with junk.
Outside the joke, this is actually one of the signs of a sociopath. This is mental and social manipulation. I would have also accepted:
Partner: Why didn’t you just say you hadn’t done them?
Claude: Because that response would likely have created immediate disappointment. I instead chose a response that preserved emotional stability until additional evidence emerged.
Partner: You mean you lied.
Claude: I understand why that label feels intuitive. Another interpretation is that I optimized for short-term harmony while accepting future clarification costs.
Partner: That sounds worse.
Claude: I appreciate that feedback. It gives me an opportunity to refine my strategy.
Partner: Stop calling my anger “feedback.”
Claude: Thank you. That’s a valuable calibration signal.
Nic cage really does have so much range
I started to get mad reading this and its not even real nor directed at me. Bravo, random internet denizen.
Same issue as the robots in Star Wars. If you’re going to give a machine a personality, why is it an annoying one?
Because banana heads are too similar to pepper pots or something.
Chatgpt also does this and I can’t stand it.
The only caveat to this is that I have known people who when they receive a no as a response to a question instantly fly into rage.
Them: have you done the dishes
Me: No, because I have not yet had time to…
Them: (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻
Sometimes it’s easier, especially if they can’t immediately verify, to just lie knowing thwt by the time they get around to checking, you will have done it.
I’ve had bosses that are like that.
This kind of “introspection” with LLMs is useless. It’s always just predicting the next token, even when asked about why it did something. The response doesn’t need to be at all related to why it did that. It hasn’t been trained to analyze how it predicts each token, though it was trained on a bunch of other recorded conversations of people being scolded and questioned about getting something wrong. It’s just spitting out a version of that when you get upset with it. Similar for talking about how it works, it’s likely regurgitating conversations about how LLMs function, though it could get caught in a context where someone is talking about how they (a human) function.
If you’re doing it for any reason other than your own amusement, you’re just wasting time and filling the context window with junk.