Ask HN: Do you say please and thank you to your LLMs?
13
hhealthworker about 4 hours ago 37 comments
DE version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
This is an orthogonal question to whether LLMs have qualia (almost certainly no) and to the question of whether any hypothetical qualia would be in any way correlated with word choice (also almost certainly no), as opposed to mechanistic factors such as runtime and memory access patterns.

Discussion (37 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
If we reduce back to the “LLMs are next word prediction algorithms” and they have a huge training corpus including positive and negative human interactions, it’s not crazy to think they’ll be influenced by the flow of those learned interactions and respond subtly better to positive interactions than negative.
I think it is ridiculous to even suggest
Imagine typing "please" and "thank you' into Google's search bar for the past 20 years. That would be absolutely nonsense right? So why would I use those words for an LLM
But this only makes sense in the context of a new ask, and not as a standalone message
Chatbots go through a reinforcement learning phase, which should be enough to make the LLM helpful regardless of the tone of the prompt, but you may still get better result if your prompt is made in a way that would get the most helpful response from a human.
It is not anthropomorphizing, it is helping the LLM recognize a pattern.
That rubber duck you used to talk to is still there... You don't have to pay a prostitute just to be able to think out loud.
But, more honestly, it's just a social habit and saving keystrokes isn't worth training myself out of it.
We anthropomorphise things very easily -- dogs, toys, cars -- because we're wired as social beings to have theory of mind. It's no surprise that AI chat, which mimics us, is popular.
But yes where I think it will introduce additional weight to my prompting, e.g. 'Ensure the output is orange' is not the same weighting as 'Please ensure the output is orange' and that is not the same weighting as 'PLEASE ensure the output is orange'.
I don’t reply “thanks” like I would to a person though, I just close the chat if I have no more follow-ups
The anthropomorphisation those companies push is one of the most annoying and unhealthy aspect of llms.
It's more for me than anything. Kind of cathartic, really. "Man curses at machine, calls its mother a toaster."
It makes me feel better, but doesn't help.
I just see:
Thinking: The user is unhappy. I need to .... <whatever> (and then probably the same dumb shit again).
LLMs are useful but sometimes fucking frustrating dumb shits of loose transitors.
> please do $x
>> $x
> thanks. Now do $y
If I have ever spent a whole turn on something that could be called a thank you is was something like "the way you answer that [in specific way] was very helpful – thanks. Can you please remember to raise that sort of point in the future?" So still not an extra round