Good liars believe themselves generally. I've long thought that this is why professional liars are so frequently victims of cons-- their ability to _believe_ is both what makes them effective liars but it also is what makes them vulnerable to other people's lies.
The LLM has an easier time being plausible than most liars in that it doesn't have any other coherent goal than plausibility. It doesn't want to make money, convince you to sleep with it, glorify its own worth. It just produces plausible output. When it's wrong it usually errors in the direction of being more plausible than the truth.
> What I missed was that so many people would use LLMs for things which aren't easily or immediately falsified.
Bingo.
Personally, I was also completely blindsided by the fact that many people like the glazing. I find it utterly repulsive even at the lower levels put out by OpenAI's commercial competitors -- so much so that I'm failing to use these tools even where they make sense. I'm not surprised that other people feel more neutral about it, but it seems inconceivable to me that anyone likes it. But clearly many do.
It is frustrating and a bit fun, something like "a guide for buying X featuring Bob" instead of "tell me how can i buy X"
So for example biting into celery or bread with a crust gives that feeling. Whereas salads and rice, small beans etc. lack these elements. It’s just some mushy mass of small things going into your mouth, you don’t get to really use your teeth much at all.
So it’s not really the burger aspect at all for me. As a chef I could probably whip up a lot of vegetarian options that scratch that itch for carnivorous humans.