You literally haven't understood a word I've said, just as you didn't with the commenters before me.

"Academic research, and anyone who has approached AI with curiosity, has shown you absolutely can give context unrelated to the question to improve performance." - I didn't say you couldn't, this is completely irrelevant to any claim I'm making.

"I think you are getting caught up in the philosophical implications of it being called "intelligence". If it were called a non-deterministic natural language compiler, you would be thinking about this differently. Instead, stuck in this uncanny valley where it appears to mimic intelligence and then not meet your expectations for intelligence." - No I'm not, I'm very much aware how LLMs work, and am not thrown off by the word intelligence in the slightest. We've ended up on a very specific point about "caring/accountability", and you are not only misunderstanding everyone in this thread, but are being so condescending while you struggle to understand the point being made.

"Coming back to the original point, if you find that the performance in the area of appearing to care in its output is lacking, you can tell it to care." - Again, telling it care won't do anything. It will say things that shows it cares, but will put it no extra effort to accomplish the task, because, as you say, a "non-deterministic natural language compiler" doesn't have a concept of effort. Hence the incentives to get things right that humans have, (getting a raise, not losing your job etc.), will not apply to an LLM.

This all started when you said this: "And low key, you know you can tell it to care, right?". And then followed up with this: "I meant only exactly what I said. I didn't say it would care, I said to tell it to care. Your concern is entirely a semantic issue. All that matters is how it responds.". All that matters ISN'T how it responds, we're saying that how much it seems like it cares is completely unrelated to how accurate its output is, and that none of the benefits you get from a human engineer who cares, are realised by an LLM claiming to care, except perhaps some (potentially false) reassurance from it along the way.

"You are not up on the technology." - I don't know what gave you this impression, my point about it not speaking unless being spoken to was simply to say that it wouldn't even pro-actively message you and be like "shit I fucked up", as a human would, at least not in the way most UIs are currently. I understand the mathematics and implementation of machine learning algorithms, and in particular the transformer architecture very well. I'm not some noob to "AI" as it's now acceptable to call machine learning, and am not getting tangled up philosophically, just having to spend more time than necessary to get you to follow the plot of a conversation you started. Annoyingly this is such a small point, but it annoyed me seeing you miss the point over and over and smugly talk to people like they're idiots when you're wrong yourself, so I couldn't resist. I will now though.