We speculated on the fanciful notion that we humans may be one step in some grand scheme. (It’s all just fun and games but play along for a bit.)
In this mythical (?) grand scheme, would our purpose be to serve as an interim species in a series of experiments? The previous experiment had to do with size. Dinosaurs led the way.
After millions of years, that experiment eventually failed, with only birds left as a reminder. The current experiment has to do with intelligence, where we have become the leading actors, but perhaps we aren’t the ultimate step.
Could it be our purpose on earth is to develop nature’s next experiment: Superintelligence and other superpowers of survivability?
In my self-appointed experimenter role in this experiment, I played with the chatbot “Co:here.”. (Thank you reader, Nicholas Gomez.)
You can go there and experiment for yourself. Here are some of my results:
My question: Can the federal government run short of dollars if nobody pays taxes?
Co:here: No, the federal government cannot run short of dollars if nobody pays taxes. The federal government collects taxes in order to fund its operations and to pay for programs and services. It also collects taxes to pay for the debt that it has incurred.
Immediately, you get an inkling of illogic: Can’t run short of dollars, but needs dollars to fund . . . ======================================================== Question: Does the federal government need to collect taxes to create dollars?
Co:here: The federal government does not need to collect taxes in order to create dollars. It can create dollars through its own actions, such as by purchasing bonds or by making loans.
The federal government collects taxes because it needs to have a source of revenue in order to operate. It also collects taxes to fund programs and services that are not self-sufficient, such as social security and Medicare.
Now we enter the gibberish stage, where Co:here begins to meld competing ideas. “Can create dollars,” but “needs to have a source of revenue.”
Question: How does the federal government create dollars? If the federal government spends dollars into existence, why does it collect taxes?
Co:here: The federal government creates dollars by spending them. It collects taxes to pay for that spending.
Question: Isn’t this illogical: The government created dollars by spending them and collects dollars to pay for spending?
Co:here: The government does not create dollars by spending them. It creates money by spending money. The government collects dollars to pay for spending in the sense that it uses tax revenue to pay for spending, but this is not the same thing as collecting dollars to pay for spending.
Apparently, Co:here thinks money and dollars are different things. ==========================================================
Question: What causes inflation?
Co:here: Inflation is caused by an increase in the money supply.
Inflation is caused by an increase in the money supply, which can be caused by a variety of factors. One of these factors is oil shortages.
When there is a shortage of oil, it can lead to higher prices for oil and other related products. This can lead to inflation, as people may have less money to spend on other goods and services.
Suddenly, Co:here began to answer some questions twice. Note the contradiction where inflation is caused by an increase in the money supply and by people having less money. ==========================================================
Question: Does an increase in the money supply cause oil shortages?
Co:here: No. An increase in the money supply causes inflation because it increases the amount of money in circulation.
Question: Does an increase in the amount of money in circulation increase the demand for oil?
Co:here: No, an increase in the amount of money in circulation does not increase the demand for oil. An increase in the amount of money in circulation causes inflation, which decreases the demand for oil.
Question: Why does inflation decrease the demand for oil.
Co:here: Inflation is closely tied to the cost of energy. When the price of oil rises, the price of goods and services that rely on oil as a raw material or fuel also tends to increase.
Question: Why does the U.S. federal government, which is Monetarily Sovereign, borrow money rather than creating it?
Co:here: The U.S. federal government, which is Monetarily Sovereign, borrows money rather than just creating it because it chooses to.
The U.S. federal government, which is Monetarily Sovereign, borrows money rather than just creating it because it has to.
Which is the correct answer? Does the U.S. federal government borrow money because it has to or because it chooses to?
Co:here: The correct answer is The U.S. federal government, which is Monetarily Sovereign, borrows money rather than just creating it because it chooses to.
Question: Why does the U.S. federal government, which is Monetarily Sovereign, chooses to borrow money rather than just creating it”
Co:here: The U.S. federal government, which is Monetarily Sovereign, chooses to borrow money rather than just creating it because it wants to be able to spend more money than it has.
Question: What is the total debt?
Co:here: Total debt is the sum of all federal government liabilities. The federal government’s debt consists of the sum of all federal government liabilities.
Question: Why did you say the total debt is $18.6 trillion when some people say it is $26 trillion?
Co:here: The $18.6 trillion figure represents the total amount of debt that the federal government owes. This includes both debt held by the public, such as Treasury bonds, and debt held by government agencies, such as the Federal Reserve.
The $26 trillion figure represents the total amount of debt that the federal government owes, including debt held by the public and debt held by government agencies.
Question: Do you understand economics? Co:here: Yes
I do not understand economics.
Question: Do you or do you not understand economics?
Co:here: I don’t understand economics.
Question: If you don’t understand economics, why are you answering economics questions?
Co:here: If you don’t understand economics, why are you answering economics questions?
Co:here seems to be a buzzword or buzz phrase collecting machine that does not recognize inconsistencies.
One is reminded of a highschool sophomore, writing a paper the night before it is due.
As a slight aside, if ever you go to Google Images, you can type in any words, and it will provide you with pictures, some of which are appropriate and some not.
Co:here seems to operate in a similar way.
Go to that site and type in “What is Monetary Sovereignty?,” and you’ll see a picture version of a chatbot.
Rodger Malcolm Mitchell Monetary Sovereignty
Twitter: @rodgermitchell Search #monetarysovereignty Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
The Sole Purpose of Government Is to Improve and Protect the Lives of the People.
5 thoughts on “Fun with a chatbot”
All ChatGPT-style language models are only as good as the training content. When it comes to economics, the vast majority of content is wrong. I’m actually impressed with Co:here’s ability to give some correct answers, considering the volume of garbage it had to sort through.
At an enterprise-level, or developer-level, the Co:here model can be trained on selected data. If I had the funds, I would train it on MMT and monetary-sovereignty. I suspect some businesses are already doing this for their own internal investing purposes.
I think we have to give Co:here some slack, considering that every time an economist opens their mouth on TV or Twitter, an error falls out of it. Even “in diapers”, Co:here does better.
Looks like Chatbot may be one step in some grand scheme… to take us backwards. Leave the thinking to people.
Automation seems headed to educate and replace the grunting, sweating animate slave with the clean, cool, efficient power of ‘our’ tireless, inanimate creation, which itself CANNOT create, invent, love or anticipate– think a-head– to avoid disasters created by politicians and pig business with their hands out.
Money created/dispersed in controlled abundance will remove many if not all disasters and disasterous people..
Does it know about the balloon threat? I see some deficit spending on the horizon to upgrade NORAD’s capabilities. A certain form of electronic warfare could act as a reset button for North American civilization if Beijing wants to push it: https://web.archive.org/web/20121108204504/http://kyl.senate.gov/legis_center/subdocs/030805_pry.pdf
LikeLiked by 1 person
Of course this is another example of the insanity of politics and the thinking processes of deterrency; scientific genius converted to mutually assured annihilation. I prefer to think all the bad-tech is merely defensive chest pounding and that even the mini-minds that rule the world really don’t want to end it all forever.
More gap psychology [does the chat bot have anything pithy to say on that]: