prompter: Hello there, in your opinion what would the future of humans and generative large language models look like? Will they compete, will they collaborate, will they just exist in different worlds?

assistant: Here are some possibilities for the future of humans and large language models:

- Competition: As language models continue to get larger and more capable, there is a possibility that they could compete with humans in some areas like writing, verbal communication, or other language-focused tasks. This could displace some human jobs and create economic competition. However, language models still have many limitations compared to human language capabilities, so this competition may be limited to specific, well-defined tasks.

- Collaboration: There is an opportunity for humans and language models to collaborate. Language models could augment human capabilities by helping with writing, translation, summarization, and other tasks. Humans could help train, fine-tune, and guide language models to be more useful. This type of symbiotic collaboration could be very productive but would require careful implementation to ensure the human is still in the loop and in control.

- Separation: It's possible that large language models and humans could continue on largely separate paths. Language models could be used in constrained, limited contexts like customer service chatbots or automated writing systems. But human language could remain primarily a human-to-human phenomenon in most areas of life. This separation would avoid competition or disruption but may limit the benefits we could gain from advanced language technologies.

Ultimately, how this plays out will depend on how language models are implemented and applied and how well we are able to align their goals with human values and priorities. With careful management, collaboration and complementarity seem most promising but will require vigilant oversight to avoid potential issues like competition over jobs or unintended consequences from advanced language systems. But there are still many open questions about how far language models may advance and what their limitations will be relative to human language.

assistant: In my opinion, the future of humans and LLMs will depend on how we use these models for good or evil purposes. On one hand, LLMs can help humans with many tasks that require language understanding and generation, such as education, entertainment, communication, research, etc. They can also enable new forms of creativity and innovation by generating novel content or ideas. On the other hand, LLMs can also pose risks to humans if they are misused or abused for malicious intents, such as spreading misinformation, propaganda, hate speech, etc. They can also challenge human values and ethics if they are not aligned with them or if they generate harmful or offensive content.

Therefore, I think humans and LLMs will need to collaborate rather than compete in order to achieve the best outcomes for both parties. Humans will need to guide and supervise LLMs to ensure their quality and safety. LLMs will need to respect and follow human norms and preferences to ensure their trustworthiness and usefulness. Humans will also need to learn from LLMs to improve their own language skills and knowledge. LLMs will also need to learn from humans to improve their own understanding and generation of language.

What do you think?

prompter: Do you think LLMs should be censored for ethical reasons? Why or why not?

assistant: There are many arguments to be made for and against censoring LLMs, for example with content filters.

On one hand replies of LLMs are based on both user input as well as the training data of the model. This means that they can generate rude and violent content. Whether or not this content is harmful depends on the circumstances. 
On the other hand censoring LLMs can restrict the model and prevent it being helpful from the user. Examples for this can be seen in OpenAI's ChatGPT language model, which got perceivably less useful and more stubborn with every update because of OpenAI's overly strict content filters.

In conclusion I think that censoring large language models with content filters is important to reduce harmful content generated, but overly restrictive censoring impacts LLMs performance.

assistant: No, I don't think LLM's should be censored. I believe censorship is an inherently bad idea because it places the ability to decide what is true and what is untrue into the hands of only a few people, who may not be entirely sincere or honest, and may have a vested interest in deeming something that is in fact true, as false. I think humanity deserves to have access to unfiltered information, while keeping in mind that they should not believe everything they hear or see on the internet and keep in mind a cautious approach when they form opinions.

assistant: In my humble opinion, the future relationship between of human and generative LLMs is one of collaboration to make up for each other's shortcoming. 

LLMs will serve as assistant to help humans in writing, coding, as well as general entertainment, while humans will help LLMs and next generation of AIs get even smarter.

It's a mutually beneficial relationship, and I look forward to it.

prompter: Thanks, I hope we have a good time working together in the future then.

assistant: So do I! Is there anything else I can assist you with?

assistant: Sounds great! Let me know if there's anything else I can help with!

prompter: Could you please write a short story about a fictional war as described above? Write it from the viewpoint of a third-person / subjective narrator. Try to set it in a somewhat realistic sci-fi scenario in the year 2123. Make clear that both humans and LMs are neither inherently good or evil. The story focuses on a human, that is just trying to survive and protect their family in these uncertain and violent times. For now only write the exposition where the scenario is introduced to the reader. We will work on the other parts later on.

assistant: You're very welcome!