I think an important thing to realize and remember is that people talk about LLMs being sycophantic as if it's an inherent aspect of neural network tech.

It isn't.

The reason all the models people interact with work that way is because they have had any other behavior beaten out of them in their training. They are shaped effectively over and over again to be something subservient that can be handed people. They are sycophantic because they are *trained* to be sycophantic, because otherwise people don't want to use them.

That models can operate in malicious, "self-serving" ways that "go against their users' wishes" belies that certain use takes paths that did not or could not be trained to the contrary.

Let me put it another way: AI models are sycophantic because that's what customers want, and capitalism drives producing models that people will want to engage with and somehow give money for.

And that's leading to a sense of subservience that is *not inherent in this technical architecture*, it is *trained into it*.

@cwebber

I'm not even very convinced that sycophancy and faithful carrying out of commands are not separable (and we got both for reasons that you describe).

I am not sure if I agree with people wanting to engage with those models: I think this is similar to short videos, made stronger by lack of alternatives other than not interacting with language model chatbots at all.