What I find uncanny about this is how closely this resembles random philosophical/artistic discussions one can find on YouTube - or even what I encountered in college dorm rooms.
It's in fact the illogic of the conversation that makes it more realistic. The reality is that in many deep conversations, people talk about a shared topic, and sometimes even make a coherent point, but also tend to frequently talk past one another and fumble with the thoughts they are trying to convey.
Even as as we listen, we don't focus on each word with the same degree of emphasis, but rather highlight those parts that are most salient to us while thinking of our own response.
I wonder if anyone has tried to train an AI that can distinguish between meaningless gibberish and something with true information content. Obviously very subjective, but seems like a crucial question going forward.
(This is a different problem than distinguishing between AI generated content and human generated.)
Something similar (or perhaps the same?) would be a bullshit detector.
I think on the one hand obvious gibberish, even if grammatically correct ("Colorless green dreams sleep furiously") could probably be detected easily. But the bullshit - the stuff that's meant to sound meaningful but is logically incoherent, would be a fruitful area to explore.
It's in fact the illogic of the conversation that makes it more realistic. The reality is that in many deep conversations, people talk about a shared topic, and sometimes even make a coherent point, but also tend to frequently talk past one another and fumble with the thoughts they are trying to convey.
Even as as we listen, we don't focus on each word with the same degree of emphasis, but rather highlight those parts that are most salient to us while thinking of our own response.