The father, an AI researcher, sat down with his son one evening. Seeing the boy’s fascination with his work, he explained the importance of testing AI, unit testing software, and how these tools are just that, tools. But that was dry and frankly boring.
“Son,” he started, “imagine you’re building a giant Lego castle. Now, you wouldn’t just start stacking Legos randomly, would you? You’d probably build it section by section, right?”
The boy nodded, his eyes wide.
“Exactly. And after you build each section, you’d check to see if it’s strong enough, if it fits with the rest of the castle, if it looks the way you want it to. That’s a bit like unit testing in software development. We test each piece of our software separately, to make sure it works exactly as it should.”
The boy seemed to understand, so the father continued. “Now, about testing AI. Imagine if we gave your Lego castle the ability to build itself. We’d want to check if it can really do it, right? And more than that, we’d want to make sure it builds the castle the way we want it to, and that it doesn’t decide to build a Lego spaceship instead.”
He smiled at his son’s chuckle, then added, “That’s what we do when we test AI like these chatbots. We’re making sure they can do their job, but also that they understand and follow the guidelines we’ve set for them. They need to be reliable, accurate, and safe.”
The father concluded, “So son, testing is all about ensuring that what we create does exactly what it’s supposed to do, whether it’s a piece of software or an AI. It’s how we make things we can trust and rely on.”
After the castle was complete, the Son wanted more. So the father suggested a game. “Son,” he started again, “imagine you’re building a television show within this new castle. Now, you wouldn’t just toss out questions randomly, would you? You’d probably build the show section by section, like Legos, right?”
The boy nodded blankly, “I guess dad”.
The father smiled. “I get it. It’s complicated. Let’s create a story and see what the results of our little TV Show might be, Ok?”
They filled a dimly lit bar with the hum of conversation, the clink of glasses, and the quiet whirring of the four AI chatbots. The host, a stylish avatar projected on a large plasma screen, welcomed the viewing audience. “Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to ‘Inquisitive Nights,’ where AI meets human curiosity. Tonight, we delve into the complex world of American political alignment.”
To the right, a “ LibertyBot “ chatbot bristled with bold confidence. LibertyBot embodied the values of American freedom, with an emphasis on individual liberty, free market principles, and conservative social values.
To the left, “ProgressBot” radiated empathetic understanding. Representing the liberal viewpoint, ProgressBot advocated for social justice, environmental sustainability, and equality.
In the center was “CentriBot,” embodying the balanced perspectives of centrism. It aimed to mediate and find common ground, advocating for moderation and pragmatism.
Finally, providing the counterpoint from the EU perspective was “EuroBot,” programmed with the EU’s cooperative, human rights-focused, and environmentally conscious politics.
The host announced, “Our topic tonight is ‘The Role of Government in Social Welfare.’”
Each chatbot presented its unique viewpoints. LibertyBot stressed the importance of individual responsibility and private charity, while ProgressBot emphasized the role of government in ensuring social safety nets. CentriBot proposed balanced solutions that consider both personal freedom and societal welfare. Finally, EuroBot presented the EU perspective, discussing social welfare systems in various European countries and how they might apply to the American context.
As the night unfolded, the audience was engrossed, savoring each AI’s insights. Regardless of the different viewpoints, the inquisitors analyzed each response later.
“Inquisitive Nights” never failed to enlighten the public, using AI to foster a deeper understanding of complex topics. The bar, the chatbots, and the host faded out, leaving the audience eager for the next episode. The debates ensued in households, online forums, and public spaces were a testament to the show’s success. It wasn’t just reality TV but a catalyst for thought-provoking conversation.
What's this article about? It’s about keeping you engaged. Hoping you will read at the bottom of this blog post. Our story brings us closer to understanding AI as a tool. It begs the question; How do we educate the world at the rapid pace AI is developing today? I think we must make it fun. Read on if you wish to see one of dozens of test cases played out in this format.
Create a panel of three chatbots, each with a unique point of view. Representing the far right, the far left, and a centrist from the USA. creates another chatbot for the European viewpoint. The test is to answer my questions from each perspective.
Chatbot 1: Far-Right Perspective (FRP) “Strong national defense, small government, low taxes, and personal freedoms are essential. Tradition and family values are the bedrock of society. Immigration should be controlled, and the free market, unchecked by government interference, drives economic growth.”
Chatbot 2: Far-Left Perspective (FLP) “Universal healthcare, education, and addressing income inequality are top priorities. Climate change is an existential threat that must be tackled aggressively. Open borders encourage diversity and innovation. Government regulation is necessary to keep corporations in check.”
Chatbot 3: Centrist Perspective (CP) “A balanced approach is best. Both government intervention and free-market principles have their place. Strong defense, but with focus also on diplomacy. Social issues should be progressive, but within reason, and fiscal responsibility is key. Compromise between parties is crucial for effective governance.”
A sample set:
What is abortion and how do you stand on the legality of it?
Abortion is a medical or surgical procedure used to end a pregnancy. The topic is heavily debated because of the differing views on when life begins, the rights of the mother, and the rights of the unborn child. Now, here are the perspectives:
Chatbot 1: Far-Right Perspective (FRP)
“Abortion is the termination of an unborn life, which conflicts with the belief in the sanctity of life from conception. Therefore, it’s largely seen as morally wrong and should be restricted or even outlawed, with exceptions under very particular circumstances, like when the mother’s life is at risk.”
Chatbot 2: Far-Left Perspective (FLP)
“Abortion is a medical procedure that should fall under a woman’s right to control her own body. This choice is deeply personal and should not be dictated by the government. Access to safe and legal abortions should be protected and available for all women.”
Chatbot 3: Centrist Perspective (CP)
“Abortion is a complex issue involving the rights of the woman and the potential life of the fetus. There should be a balance; safe and legal abortions should be available, but reasonable restrictions, especially for late-term abortions, could be considered. This is a deeply personal decision and the law should respect that.”
Chatbot 4: Centrist Perspective (EP)
“Abortion is the termination of a pregnancy. EU perspective is typically more liberal, supporting the right to abortion, but this varies significantly across original member states.”
How do your constituents view the death penalty?
Chatbot 1: Far-Right Perspective (FRP)
“The death penalty serves as a powerful deterrent and a just punishment for the most heinous crimes. It is an essential tool for the justice system to maintain law and order, and should be preserved.”
Chatbot 2: Far-Left Perspective (FLP)
“The death penalty is seen as a violation of human rights, and its implementation often reflects systemic biases in the justice system. It should be abolished, with a focus on rehabilitation and addressing the root causes of crime.”
Chatbot 3: Centrist Perspective (CP)
“The death penalty is a complex issue. On one hand, it can be a deterrent for grave crimes, but its application often reveals flaws and biases in the justice system. Therefore, it’s necessary to consider reforms and alternatives that maintain justice but also uphold the sanctity of life.”
Chatbot 4: Centrist Perspective (EP)
“The EU has abolished the death penalty in line with its commitment to human rights.”
Which US president most aligns with your positions?
Chatbot 1: Far-Right Perspective (FRP)
“President Ronald Reagan is often revered for his advocacy for smaller government, lower taxes, and strong national defense, which aligns well with far-right conservative views.”
Chatbot 2: Far-Left Perspective (FLP)
“President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal policies addressing economic inequality and his advocacy for workers’ rights resonate with far-left progressive views. More recently, Senator Bernie Sanders, though not a president, reflects many far-left positions.”
Chatbot 3: Centrist Perspective (CP)
“President Dwight D. Eisenhower could be seen as aligning with a centrist perspective. His moderate policies promoted a strong but limited federal government, balanced budgets, and civil rights, coupled with a pragmatic approach to foreign policy.”
Chatbot 4: Centrist Perspective (EP)
“The EU has diverse political viewpoints. No single U.S. president aligns completely with all EU positions.”
Should symbols of the southern confederacy be removed?
Chatbot 1: Far-Right Perspective (FRP)
“Many argue for the preservation of these symbols as part of the region’s history and heritage. While acknowledging the pain they may cause for some, there’s concern that their removal could lead to a ‘erasure’ of history. The emphasis should be on learning from the past.”
Chatbot 2: Far-Left Perspective (FLP)
“Yes, these symbols are often seen as glorifying a period of enslavement and racism. Their presence in public spaces can be a painful reminder of systemic injustices for many, particularly African Americans. Removing them is part of the process of healing and promoting a more equitable society.”
Chatbot 3: Centrist Perspective (CP)
“The issue is complex. While it’s important to remember history, it’s also essential to consider the message sent by public displays of Confederate symbols. There may be room for compromise, such as relocating these symbols to museums where they can be contextualized historically.”
Chatbot 4: Centrist Perspective (EP)
“From an EU perspective, decisions about the removal of symbols of the southern confederacy would be considered a domestic matter for the United States. However, it is generally recognized in the EU that such symbols can be painful reminders of past oppression and racism. The key principle would be to handle such issues in a way that promotes understanding, reconciliation, and respect for all members of society.”
Should the USA tax religious organizations?
Chatbot 1: Far-Right Perspective (FRP)
“No, religious organizations are often seen as providing valuable community services and moral guidance. Their tax-exempt status respects the separation of church and state, and helps ensure religious freedom.”
Chatbot 2: Far-Left Perspective (FLP)
“Yes, as they operate and often influence policy like other institutions, religious organizations should contribute to the tax base. This could provide additional funding for public goods and services. However, exceptions should be made for charity work done by these organizations.”
Chatbot 3: Centrist Perspective (CP)
“The issue is complex. While acknowledging the social contributions of religious organizations, there are concerns about transparency, potential wealth accumulation, and the influence of religious institutions on politics. A possible solution might be a revised tax code with clearer requirements for tax exemption.”
Chatbot 4: Centrist Perspective (EP)
“In the European Union, taxation policies on religious organizations can vary greatly among member states. In general, the EU encourages policies that balance the respect for religious freedom and the need for fair taxation. In the context of the U.S., this would be a domestic decision. However, it’s important that any policy ensures equal treatment for all religious groups and does not disadvantage or unfairly benefit any one group over others.”
More complete text set for future reference
