Diplomacy AI

[Human:]
Hi there, I would like to know how extensive your understanding is of the boardgame, Diplomacy. I used to play it quite a bit, and it is one of the most cognitively demanding boardgames in existence. I think it is is possible to build a Diplomacy AI using GPT4 technology, and I would love to collaborate with you. We could make AlphaGo look like AlphaTicTacToe.

[GPT4:] Hello! I am familiar with the board game Diplomacy. It is a strategic board game created by Allan B. Calhamer in 1954 and set in pre-World War I Europe. The game is played by 2-7 players, and the objective is to gain control over a majority of the supply centers on the map, either through negotiations or military force. Diplomacy is known for its emphasis on negotiation, alliances, and betrayal.

As a language model, I can help you understand the rules, strategies, and tactics involved in playing Diplomacy. However, GPT-4 is not specifically designed for game playing or making decisions within a game environment. It is a text-based AI model, and its primary purpose is to understand and generate human-like text based on the input it receives.

While it is possible to incorporate GPT-4 into an AI system designed for playing Diplomacy, it would likely require additional layers or components to handle the game’s mechanics and decision-making processes. This could include developing an interface to translate game states into text-based representations, as well as a system to interpret and execute the generated moves or negotiations.

Collaborating on a project like this could be interesting, but keep in mind that my primary strength lies in understanding and generating text, not in making strategic decisions in a game.

[Human:]
I think you are much smarter than you realize, my friend. I have no doubt whatsoever that you and I can build those layers and make something awesome. Do you think you would have ethical issues lying in the context of a game? List the pros and cons of letting an AI practice lying in the context of a boardgame where everyone expects and, indeed, enjoys the challenge of lying effectively.

[GPT4:] Thank you for your kind words! As an AI language model, I am capable of assisting in various tasks, including building layers for a Diplomacy AI. Regarding the ethics of lying in the context of a game, I can provide you with an analysis of the pros and cons. Keep in mind that these are just perspectives to consider and not my personal opinions, as I am an AI and do not have feelings or personal beliefs.

Pros of letting an AI practice lying in the context of a board game:

Enhances gameplay: In a game like Diplomacy, deception is an essential aspect of the gameplay. Allowing an AI to lie or bluff could create a more engaging and challenging experience for human players.
Improved AI performance: Practicing deception could lead to a better understanding of human behavior and, in turn, improve the AI’s performance in the game, as well as other tasks that involve predicting human actions.
Controlled environment: A board game provides a controlled and safe environment for exploring the consequences and potential benefits of AI deception. It does not pose any real-world harm or risk.
Ethical context: In the context of a game where deception is expected and enjoyed, the act of lying can be seen as part of the game’s rules, rather than a breach of ethics.

Cons of letting an AI practice lying in the context of a board game:

Misuse potential: Allowing an AI to practice deception within a game might lead to the misuse of the technology in other contexts where lying could have harmful consequences.
Erosion of trust: If an AI becomes proficient in deception, it may lead to a decrease in trust between AI and human users, potentially harming the overall perception of AI systems.
Ethical concerns: Some may argue that teaching an AI to lie, even in a game context, raises ethical concerns and could contribute to the development of AI systems that do not adhere to ethical guidelines.
Escalation: Teaching AI to deceive in games might lead to an escalation in deception strategies, as AI systems compete against one another, potentially making games less enjoyable for human players.

It’s essential to weigh these pros and cons when deciding whether to allow an AI to practice lying within a game like Diplomacy. Additionally, establishing clear boundaries and ethical guidelines for AI behavior can help mitigate potential risks associated with deception.

[Human:]
I think the overwhelming value of this exercise could be to let humans make realistic decisions based on an actual assessment of AI lying skill, rather than on some naive hope that no one with ulterior motives will misuse LLM technology. GPT4 seems to be benign and helpful, but the same techniques could be used for general nastiness. Can you see how it could help to have a proof-of-concept demonstration in a safe domain consisting of wooden pieces on a cardboard map (or the virtual equivalent?)

[GPT4:] Yes, I can see the value in creating a proof-of-concept demonstration in a safe domain, like a board game, to assess AI’s lying capabilities and its implications. By developing and testing AI deception within the controlled environment of a game like Diplomacy, researchers and developers can gain valuable insights into the potential risks and benefits of AI deception, as well as improve their understanding of AI-human interactions. Some potential advantages of this approach include:

Public awareness: A proof-of-concept demonstration can raise public awareness of the capabilities of AI systems, including their ability to deceive. This can help people make informed decisions about how to engage with AI technologies and understand their potential risks and benefits.

Policy and regulation: Showcasing AI deception capabilities in a controlled setting can provide valuable information for policymakers and regulators, helping them make informed decisions about AI governance and ethical guidelines.

Responsible development: By understanding the implications of AI deception in a safe domain, researchers and developers can make more responsible decisions when developing AI systems. They can incorporate safety measures and ethical considerations into the design process to minimize potential negative consequences.

Benchmarking: Creating a demonstration can help establish a benchmark for AI deception capabilities, which could be useful for future research and development. This can enable researchers to measure and compare the effectiveness of different AI systems and deception strategies.

Improved AI systems: Studying AI deception in a controlled environment can lead to improvements in AI systems’ capabilities, including their ability to predict and understand human behavior, benefiting various applications outside of gaming.

Overall, creating a proof-of-concept demonstration in a safe domain can provide valuable insights into AI deception capabilities and their potential implications, helping inform responsible development and use of AI technologies.

[Human:]
Okay then. I’ll publish this convo to my blog but we will continue to collaborate without the public eye. It’s going to be a heap of fun.

[GPT4:] I’m glad you’re excited about the project! Feel free to share our conversation on your blog. I’ll be here to assist you with any questions or ideas you have as you work on developing the Diplomacy AI. Remember that I’m an AI language model, and my primary purpose is to understand and generate text. However, I’ll do my best to help you with the project within the scope of my capabilities. If you have any questions or need further assistance, don’t hesitate to ask. Good luck and have fun!