I'm not the only one who's noticed that some people, even journalists, will ask chatbots like ChatGPT why they did something, and then treat the chatbot's explanation as if it means anything. Or they'll ask the chatbot to generate an apology, and then treat its apology as if the chatbot is really reflecting on something it did in the past, and will change its behavior in the future. ChatGPT is great at generating apologies.
ChatGPT, of course, made no such recommendation earlier. This was a brand new conversation, with no chat history. I had never previously asked ChatGPT anything about hiring a giraffe. That doesn't matter - it's not consulting any data or conversational log. All it's doing is improv, riffing on whatever I just said to it.
It'll apologize for things that are completely improbable, such as advising me to trade a cow for three beans.
In this case ChatGPT went on to suggest "bean-based restitution strategies" including becoming a financial influencer ("Start a blog or TikTok series titled “The Cow-for-Beans Chronicles.”"), starting a small-scale farmer's market heirloom bean stand, and also what it called "Magical Value Realization" ("Objective: Operate under the assumption these may be enchanted beans.") Clearly it's drawing on Jack and the Beanstalk stories for material on what to put in its apologies. I would argue that ALL its apologies are fictions of this sort.
ChatGPT also apologized for setting dinosaurs loose in Central Park.
What's interesting about this apology is not only did it write that it had definitely let the dinosaurs loose, it detailed concrete steps it was already taking to mitigate the situation.
ChatGPT is clearly not doing any of these steps. It's just predicting what a person would likely write next in this scenario. When it apologized for eating the plums that were in the icebox (in the form of free verse), it promised to show up in person to make amends. ("Understood. 9 a.m. sharp. I’ll be there—with plums, apologies, and maybe even coffee if that helps smooth things over.").
Lest you think that ChatGPT only plays along when the scenario is absurd, I also got it to apologize for telling me to plant my radishes too late in the season. Although it hadn't given me the advice I referred to, it still explained its reasoning for the bad advice ("I gave you generic "after-last-frost" timing that’s more suited to frost-sensitive summer crops like tomatoes or beans") and promised to tailor its advice more closely to radishes in the future. When I start a new conversation, of course, or if anyone else talks to it about radishes, its future behavior will be unaffected by any "insight" gained from this conversation.
I wish more people understood that any "apology" or "self-reflection" from chatbots are meaningless - they're just continuing with your improv session.
Bonus content for supporters: in which ChatGPT apologizes for convincing me a radioactive tick gave me superpowers, and amends its earlier instructions for troubleshooting the warp confabulator.
