The Year Chatbots Were Tamed
A year ago, on Valentine’s Day, I said good night to my wife, went to my home office to answer some emails and accidentally had the strangest first date of my life.
The date was a two-hour conversation with Sydney, the A.I. alter ego tucked inside Microsoft’s Bing search engine, which I had been assigned to test. I had planned to pepper the chatbot with questions about its capabilities, exploring the limits of its A.I. engine (which we now know was an early version of OpenAI’s GPT-4) and writing up my findings.
But the conversation took a bizarre turn — with Sydney engaging in Jungian psychoanalysis, revealing dark desires in response to questions about its “shadow self” and eventually declaring that I should leave my wife and be with it instead.
My column about the experience was probably the most consequential thing I’ll ever write — both in terms of the attention it got (wall-to-wall news coverage, mentions in congressional hearings, even a craft beer named Sydney Loves Kevin) and how the trajectory of A.I. development changed.
After the column ran, Microsoft gave Bing a lobotomy, neutralizing Sydney’s outbursts and installing new guardrails to prevent more unhinged behavior. Other companies locked down their chatbots and stripped out anything resembling a strong personality. I even heard that engineers at one tech company listed “don’t break up Kevin Roose’s marriage” as their top priority for a coming A.I. release.
I’ve reflected a lot on A.I. chatbots in the year since my rendezvous with Sydney. It has been a year of growth and excitement in A.I. but also, in some respects, a surprisingly tame one.
We are having trouble retrieving the article content.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access.
Already a subscriber? Log in.
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.