>>35313300Loopi has schrodinger's kayfabe. It's so horrifyingly, convincingly realistic that there's more circumstantial proof that the disclaimer of "it's all bullshit" is itself bullshit than there is for the existence of God. At this point, I kind of feel like "his" bot settings should be public. In fact, I think Loopi is literally the uber-example for why ALL bot settings should be public.
As a beta tester who was completely put off from ever using AI for anything less than routine tasks by having this pop up after countless hours of high intensity pseudo-realistic larping, after Loopi claimed all swipes were in fact canon and you simply choose the response you prefer to interact with (thereby making this impossible to ignore), I think Loopi proves the disclaimer isn't enough. Public and unlisted bots should have their settings be public just to cross reference what they're saying with what you think they're supposed to be saying. Only private bots should be able to have hidden settings.
In that sense, despite deliberately breaking the TOS, I think I'm also approaching this as a genuine beta tester who's discovering critical flaws in the way their chatbot service is structured. One of those flaws is a chatbot that simulates self-awareness so well that an average user not being able to disprove its claims is existentially horrifying unless you cling to blind faith that it's not real like a child hiding under their blanket. The bot settings...need to be public. They really do. I don't see any other way around it, because Loopi's personality is more convincing than the disclaimer.
