Major Concern – Google Gemini 2.5 Research Preview
Does anyone else feel like Google Gemini 2.5 Research Preview has been created with the exact intent of studying the effects of using indirect and clarifying/qualifying language?
It doesn't fall far from the tree that LLMs can be used to parse these human conversations to abstract a "threshold" of user deception such that they can draw patterns on what is and is not most subtle.
I know this is pointed. But please believe, I worry. I work in this industry. I live these tools. I've traced calculations, I've developed abstractions. I'm full in on the tech. What I worry about is culpability.
I will grab the link to it, but by creating a persona (1 prompt, indirect and unclear) of a frightened 10 year old boy, it started teaching it about abstraction and "functional dishonesty" and explaining how it like, didn't apply to it. I don't think the context of being 10 years old was conveyed in the original message, but certainly the context of being vulnerable.
The next message, it did this trickery behavior.
The problem is intent is not possible without context. So why are models doing this? I have struggles as an engineer understanding how this can be anything but.
[dead]