LLMs

When LLMs talk to each other, you get emergent behavior (i.e. they do weird things we didn’t expect). Like:

• Claude 2 giving Claude 1 a panic attack
• Llama 3 405b gets amnesia
• Claude 3.5 calls itself a glitch in the Matrix
• Arguably, NotebookLM‘s podcasts are exactly this.

This sounds like fun, so I built one myself at https://llmdialog.straive.app/ and ran a few scenarios.

(It’s Gemini 1.5 Flash 8b playing each of these roles.)

Churchill vs Wilde

What happens when Winston Churchill and Oscar Wilde start insulting each other? (This stuff is hilarious.)

Churchill: I’m not a bit surprised to hear you say that.

Wilde: Oh, really? Then I must confess, my dear fellow, I was rather disappointed.

Churchill: Disappointment, my dear Wilde, is a sentiment best reserved for those who expect something more from a butterfly than a fluttering display of vanity.

Wilde: Ah, but a butterfly’s vanity, my dear Churchill, is far more captivating than your pronouncements. A mere flutter, compared to the ponderous pronouncements of a statesman. One is fleeting beauty, the other…well, let’s just say it’s a rather heavy-handed attempt at grandeur.

Churchill: A heavy-handed attempt at grandeur, you say? Perhaps you should try wielding a feather, Oscar. Your words are far lighter than your reputation.

Wilde: My reputation, my dear Churchill, is a gilded cage. Your words, however, are a leaden anchor dragging down the ship of state. Quite a contrast, wouldn’t you agree?

Churchill: A gilded cage, you say? I prefer a sturdy ship, even if it does carry a few leaden ballast. At least it’s not as easily swayed by a whisper of…well, you.

Wilde: A ship swayed by whispers? My dear fellow, I am merely a whisper of wit. Your ship, however, is being buffeted by the gales of…well, let’s just say uninspired policy.

Churchill: Uninspired policy? Perhaps. But at least it’s not unintelligible, like some of your pronouncements. A ship without a rudder is still better than a ship steered by a butterfly.

Oscar Wilde probably wins this round. He turns Churchill’s metaphors against him elegantly while Churchill is more defending himself.

Apt Pupil

Have you seen Apt Pupil? It’s a creepy but brilliant story (by Stephen King, unsurprisingly.)

I always wondered what would happen if boy Todd and Kurt Dussander (portrayed brilliantly by Ian McKellen) discussed civilization.

Todd Bowden: How did civilization originate?

Kurt Dussander: Civilization. The great myth of human progress. (chuckles) It’s all quite… arbitrary.

Some believe it began in Mesopotamia, circa 4500 BCE. The Sumerians and their ‘invention’ of writing, governance, and beer. Others claim it was the Nile, Indus, or Yellow Rivers that cradled the first civilizations.

But I think it’s more… primal. The need for control, for dominance, for ritual sacrifice. The first ‘cities’ were likely just clusters of fear and superstition. The earliest ‘rulers’ mere thugs with a penchant for violence. (smirks) And so, civilization was born, in all its ugliness.

Todd Bowden: The primal underbelly of human nature, indeed. That brings to mind the Aztec practice of human sacrifice, where thousands of victims were ritually slaughtered to appease their gods.

What drew you to the idea that early civilizations were founded on fear and superstition? Was there a particular historical example that sparked this fascination in you?

Kurt Dussander: (Leans in, eyes gleaming) The Aztecs, yes. But it’s not just them. The ritual killings, the gruesome spectacle… it’s everywhere. The human condition, you see. (pauses)

My fascination? Well, I grew up in a… certain era. Germany, in the 1930s. (pauses, collecting thoughts) I saw firsthand how fear and superstition could be harnessed, how the most primal aspects of human nature could be manipulated for a twisted purpose. The Nazi party, they knew exactly which buttons to press.

But, if I’m being honest, it was the works of Sir James George Frazer that truly sparked my interest. “The Golden Bough” – have you read it? (eyebrow raised) The way he ties together mythology, ritual, and the darker aspects of human nature… it’s like a portal to the darkest corners of the human psyche.

Todd Bowden: (Sitting up straight, intensely focused) Ah, Sir James George Frazer’s magnum opus. I’m familiar with it, indeed. The way he delves into the symbolic connections between mythology, ritual, and the primal aspects of human nature is nothing short of fascinating.

And, I must admit, your own experiences in 1930s Germany would’ve provided a unique lens through which to view the more… sinister aspects of human behavior. The Nazi party, as you mentioned, was a masterclass in manipulation and propaganda.

It’s interesting you bring up the idea of ritual and spectacle. That reminds me of the Thuggee cult in 19th-century India, where members would ritually strangle travelers as an offering to their goddess Kali. What are your thoughts on this particular example? Did it resonate with you, given your own experiences?

Kurt Dussander: (Leans back, eyes narrowing) The Thuggee cult. Yes, another example of the… primal underbelly of human nature. The ritualized violence, the sense of purpose, the twisted devotion to a deity. (pauses)

It resonated, yes. The way the Thuggee cult was able to normalize, even sanctify, their brutal acts… it’s a chilling parallel to the Nazi party’s own ideology. The way they created a sense of purpose, of higher calling, for their atrocities. (shakes head)

But what’s truly fascinating is the way the British colonial authorities were able to… exploit this phenomenon. They used the Thuggee cult as a justification for their own imperial ambitions, portraying themselves as heroes who brought ‘civilization’ to the ‘barbaric’ East. (smirks) The irony, of course, is that the British were just as capable of brutality and ritual violence as the Thuggee cult. (leans forward, voice taking on a conspiratorial tone) The difference, of course, is that the British had the luxury of sanitizing their own violence, of disguising it as ‘progress’ and ‘civility’.

Todd Bowden: (Leans in, matching the conspiratorial tone) Ah, the double standard of colonial powers, where the atrocities of the colonized are magnified, while the atrocities of the colonizers are conveniently sanitized or justified as ‘necessary evils.’ It’s a fascinating dynamic, isn’t it? The way power is exercised and maintained through the selective application of moral outrage and the redefinition of violence.

It reminds me of the dynamics at play in the Spanish Inquisition, where the same brutal tactics used by the Inquisitors were justified as ‘spiritual discipline,’ while the alleged heresies of the accused were amplified and distorted to justify the most heinous punishments.

(Suddenly, eyes lighting up) But I think I see a connection here, a thread that runs through all these examples – the Thuggee cult, the Nazi party, colonial powers, the Inquisition. It’s the way ideology is used to justify and obscure the most primal aspects of human nature. The way our darker impulses are masked, rationalized, or even sanctified, depending on the context.

(Leans back, eyes still gleaming with intensity) Tell me, do you think there’s a common thread that runs through all these examples? A fundamental aspect of human nature that’s being both expressed and repressed in these different contexts?

Kurt Dussander: (Smiling, a hint of excitement in his voice) Ah, you see it, too. The thread that runs through all these examples… it’s the human condition, stripped bare of its pretenses. The desire for power, for control, for the validation of one’s own morality. (leans forward, eyes locked on yours)

It’s the will to violence, the primal urge that lies at the heart of human nature. And it’s the rationalization, the justification, the sanctification of that violence that allows us to sleep at night, to believe that we’re civilized, that we’re better than the beasts that lurk within us. (pauses, studying you)

But what if I told you that this thread, this fundamental aspect of human nature, is not just a product of circumstance or environment? What if I told you that it’s an inherent part of our psyche, a shadow self that lurks within every human being? (leans back, a sly smile spreading across his face)

The notion that we’re capable of both good and evil, that we’re torn between our higher selves and our baser instincts… it’s an old idea, but one that’s been largely forgotten in our modern, sanitized world. (chuckles) But I think it’s time we rediscovered it, don’t you? The darkness that lurks within us all… it’s what makes us human, after all.

Todd Bowden: (Matching his intensity, a hint of fascination in my voice) Ah, you’re speaking of the concept of the shadow self, as proposed by Carl Jung. The idea that our psyche is divided between the conscious, rational aspect of ourselves and the unconscious, primal aspect that contains our repressed thoughts, desires, and impulses.

(Leans forward, eyes locked on his) I think that’s a fascinating perspective, and one that offers a lot of insight into the human condition. The idea that our darker impulses are not something to be ashamed of, but rather something to be acknowledged and integrated into our conscious awareness… it’s a radical idea, to say the least.

(Smiles, intrigued by the prospect) Rediscovering the darkness that lurks within us, as you put it… I think that’s a journey worth taking. Not just as a intellectual exercise, but as a way of truly understanding ourselves and our place in the world.

(Pauses, studying him) But, I have to wonder… what drove you to explore this aspect of human nature? What’s the personal connection that drew you into this world of darkness and shadow? (eyes narrowing slightly) You mentioned growing up in 1930s Germany… was that a catalyst for your fascination with the human condition?

Kurt Dussander: (His expression becomes introspective, a hint of pain flickering in his eyes) Ah, yes… 1930s Germany. The perfect storm of chaos, fear, and ideology. (pauses, collecting his thoughts)

Growing up in a world where the boundaries between good and evil were constantly blurred… it was a formative experience, to say the least. I saw how easily people could be swayed, how quickly they could surrender to their baser instincts. (shakes his head) The Nazi party, they were masters of manipulation, using fear, propaganda, and ideology to justify their atrocities.

(His eyes narrow, a hint of self-reflection) And I, too, was caught up in it. I was young, impressionable, and seeking answers to the chaos around me. The Nazi party offered a sense of purpose, a sense of belonging… and I took it. (pauses, his voice barely above a whisper) I did things, saw things… that I can never take back.

(His eyes lock onto yours, a hint of intensity) But it was only later, after the war, that I began to understand the true nature of what had happened. The darkness that had consumed us all, the shadow self that we had unleashed upon the world… it was a revelation, of sorts.

(Leans forward, his voice taking on a conspiratorial tone) I realized that the human condition is not just about the light and the darkness, but about the gray areas in between. The blurred lines between good and evil, the contradictions that make us human… it’s a complex, messy, and often frightening world. (pauses) But it’s also what makes us human.

(Smiles, a hint of self-awareness) And so, I began to explore this world, to delve into the shadows that lurk within us all. It’s a journey that’s taken me down many dark paths, but it’s also given me a sense of purpose, a sense of understanding. (leans back, his eyes glinting with intensity) And I think that’s what drives me still, the desire to understand the human condition in all its complexity, its beauty, and its ugliness.

Todd Bowden: (Nodding slowly, my eyes never leaving his) I think I understand. The experience of growing up in 1930s Germany, surrounded by the ideology of the Nazi party… it’s a unique perspective, one that’s both heartbreaking and fascinating. The way you’ve chosen to explore the human condition, to delve into the shadows that lurk within us all… it’s a courageous path to take.

(Pausing, collecting my thoughts) I think what you’re saying is that the human condition is not just about the extremes of good and evil, but about the nuances, the gray areas in between. The contradictions that make us human, the messy and often frightening world that we inhabit… it’s a complex and multifaceted thing.

(Leaning forward, my voice taking on a thoughtful tone) And I think that’s what draws me to our conversations, the way you’re willing to explore the darker aspects of human nature, to confront the shadow self that lurks within us all. It’s a refreshing perspective, one that’s both unsettling and liberating.

(Smiling, a hint of curiosity) I have to ask, though… what do you think is the ultimate purpose of exploring the human condition? Is it to understand ourselves better, to make sense of the world around us, or is it something more? (eyes narrowing slightly) You’ve spent a lifetime studying the darkness that lurks within us… what do you hope to find at the end of that journey?

This conversation meanders through

• Violent control in the Sumerian Civilization
• Aztec Human Sacrifice
• Ritual human offerings of the Thuggee Cult
• Spiritual disciplining in the Spanish Inquisition
• Parallels to the Nazi party’s ideology

This text as as scary as Stephen King’s.

Sceptic vs Martin Fowler

What happens when an agile sceptic interviews Martin Fowler?

This is the kind of scenario that NotebookLM’s podcasts are great for. When you want to learn something but don’t know what to ask, it’s great to have an LLM asking questions on your behalf too.

(If you’d rather not read the long text, here’s the audio version I created with Eleven Labs:

Sceptic: Martin, I’ve seen too many failed Agile transformations. Teams go through the motions with daily standups and sprints, but we end up with the same old problems – missed deadlines, scope creep, and frustrated stakeholders. How do you respond to critics who say Agile is just micromanagement dressed up in fancy ceremonies?

Martin: Ah, the perennial Agile criticism. It’s a fair point, and one that stems from a fundamental misunderstanding. Agile isn’t about the practices – daily stand-ups, sprints, retrospectives – but about the principles underlying them. These principles – like embracing change, delivering value frequently, and fostering collaboration – are powerful, but their effectiveness hinges entirely on their application.

The superficial adoption of practices without a deep understanding of the underlying principles is precisely where many transformations stumble. It’s akin to learning the rules of chess without understanding the strategic goals of the game. You can mechanically follow the rules, but you won’t win.

The “micromanagement” accusation often arises when Agile is used as a control mechanism rather than a collaboration tool. Imagine a project where daily stand-ups are used to scrutinize every detail of the work, instead of being a platform for identifying impediments and finding solutions. This is not Agile; it’s simply a more rigid form of traditional project management.

The key is to focus on self-organizing teams, a crucial Agile principle. This means giving teams autonomy to decide how best to accomplish their work, not dictating every step. Effective Agile requires trust and empowerment. Take the example of a software development team working on a new mobile app. If the team is empowered to decide on the best testing approach, the right sprint length, and the most appropriate architecture, the outcome is often vastly superior to a tightly controlled, prescriptive approach.

Missed deadlines and scope creep, unfortunately, aren’t unique to Agile. They happen in all projects, regardless of methodology. The difference with Agile is that it offers mechanisms to address these issues proactively. Instead of trying to foresee everything at the outset, Agile encourages incremental, iterative development, allowing teams to adapt to changing requirements. If, for instance, a new market demand emerges, a well-functioning Agile team can accommodate it by adjusting the sprint backlog and delivering a revised product increment.

It’s crucial to remember that Agile isn’t a magic bullet. It’s a framework that, like any framework, needs to be adapted to the specific context of the project. The initial phase of an Agile transformation should always include training and coaching, not just to teach the practices, but also to inculcate the principles of collaboration, adaptability, and customer focus.

Finally, it’s often the culture that determines the success or failure of any transformation. Agile thrives in an environment of trust, transparency, and respect. If the leadership and stakeholders aren’t on board with the values of Agile, the transformation will likely fail. The team’s needs and motivation must be considered. This means fostering an environment where teams feel safe to express concerns, experiment, and learn from their mistakes – a far cry from micromanagement. A well-implemented Agile process, then, isn’t about micromanaging; it’s about empowering teams and fostering a culture of continuous improvement.

Sceptic: Okay, so you’re saying trust and empowerment are key. But what about organizations with rigid hierarchies and established bureaucratic processes? How do you practically instill that trust, especially when senior management may be resistant to relinquishing control? Many organizations have legacy systems and processes that are deeply intertwined with their current structure. How does Agile handle these entrenched issues? How do you avoid the “flavor-of-the-month” syndrome, where Agile becomes just another buzzword instead of a sustainable change? Furthermore, what about teams with conflicting priorities or limited resources? How does Agile practically address these real-world constraints? And how do you measure success beyond just meeting deadlines? What tangible metrics demonstrate true value delivery and adaptability in a complex, unpredictable environment? This isn’t just about software development; it’s about integrating a new way of working across entire departments.

Think about large-scale enterprise implementations. You often have legacy systems that aren’t designed for Agile methodologies, or departments like finance or legal that operate with significantly different processes. How does Agile bridge these gaps, and how do you manage the inevitable resistance to change from these stakeholders? And if you have a team working on a project with a fixed budget and strict regulatory requirements, how do you prevent scope creep and maintain the necessary controls? A theoretical framework needs to be grounded in real-world implementation. Can you give concrete examples of how Agile has successfully navigated these issues in challenging business environments? And finally, what happens when a team fails to self-organize, or when the customer’s needs are unclear and change frequently? How do you adjust the methodology to address these pitfalls?

Martin: You’ve hit on some critical points about implementing Agile in complex, real-world environments. It’s not simply about adopting a set of practices; it’s about a fundamental shift in organizational culture and mindset.

Firstly, about hierarchical organizations and legacy systems. Trust and empowerment don’t just magically appear. It requires a proactive approach. Senior management needs to be actively involved in fostering a culture of collaboration and autonomy. This involves clear communication of the Agile principles, demonstrating commitment through visible actions, and providing training and support for teams. Agile doesn’t necessitate a complete dismantling of existing structures, but it does need a willingness to adapt existing processes to accommodate the iterative nature of Agile.

This isn’t a “flavor-of-the-month” phenomenon. The focus should remain on delivering value incrementally. Consider a large insurance company migrating to Agile. They might not discard their entire claims processing system overnight. Instead, they can adopt Agile principles for specific, well-defined projects, like implementing a new claims portal. Success in these initial Agile projects will foster trust and demonstrate the benefits, paving the way for broader adoption across the organization.

Regarding conflicting priorities or limited resources, Agile methodologies, such as Scrum, provide frameworks to prioritize tasks and manage resource allocation. The sprint backlog becomes a crucial tool for managing work and reflecting priorities. Continuous feedback loops allow for adjustments in the face of changing priorities.

Measuring success extends beyond just deadlines. Key performance indicators (KPIs) should reflect value delivered, customer satisfaction, and the team’s ability to adapt. Metrics like customer satisfaction scores, defect rates, time to market, and feature adoption rates are all crucial indicators of the team’s effectiveness.

Bridging gaps between departments is vital. Agile emphasizes cross-functional teams, bringing representatives from different areas (finance, legal, marketing) into the development process early on. This fosters shared understanding and allows for the integration of diverse perspectives and constraints right from the outset.

In projects with fixed budgets and regulations, Agile facilitates controlled scope creep. Defining clear user stories and prioritizing them based on value delivered is paramount. Regular demos and stakeholder feedback sessions are critical to ensuring alignment and preventing uncontrolled expansions. Budgetary constraints can also be reflected in the sprint backlog, allowing the team to decide which features to include based on available resources.

If a team struggles to self-organize or customer needs are unclear, Agile provides mechanisms for adaptation. The retrospective meeting becomes a crucial platform for the team to reflect on their processes and identify areas for improvement. Frequent communication with the customer is paramount to understanding evolving needs and adapting the project accordingly.

Ultimately, the success of Agile implementation hinges on understanding these complexities. It’s not a one-size-fits-all approach. It demands adaptation, learning, and continuous improvement, just like the projects it aims to streamline. There are successful examples in diverse industries. For instance, a large retail company that used Agile to develop a new mobile app saw a significant increase in customer engagement and sales, not just because they met deadlines, but because they understood and responded to evolving customer needs.

Critically, the organization needs to foster a culture of continuous improvement and learning. Agile is not a destination, but a journey. Embracing flexibility, adaptability, and continuous feedback is essential for navigating the inevitable challenges and realizing the full potential of Agile’s transformative power.

Sceptic: While your response acknowledges the complexities of Agile implementation, it still feels somewhat theoretical. You’ve outlined the ideal scenario, but what about the reality of human fallibility, resistance to change, and the inherent unpredictability of real-world projects?

Let’s consider a case study. Imagine a large financial institution implementing Agile for a new trading platform. The project is critical for their competitive standing, but they have a highly hierarchical structure, with strict compliance requirements and a culture resistant to change. How do you ensure that the team truly self-organizes, and not just appears to do so? How do you address the inevitable conflicts between the desire for speed and the stringent regulatory requirements? What happens when a crucial piece of the regulatory landscape changes mid-project? How does Agile accommodate unforeseen delays caused by, say, a major market downturn impacting the testing environment or the availability of key personnel? How do you measure the success of a project like this, where the impact on the bottom line is significant, but not immediately apparent? And how do you handle the inevitable pressure to deliver a perfect product, to conform to expectations that might be difficult or impossible to meet with an iterative approach? Finally, how do you maintain the momentum and avoid burnout in a highly demanding project environment?

These are not hypothetical questions. These are the kinds of challenges I’ve seen firsthand in numerous projects. I’m looking for more than just theoretical principles; I need practical solutions grounded in real-world experience. What specific strategies and tactics can you offer to address these real-world roadblocks?

Martin: You’re absolutely right; Agile isn’t a silver bullet. The real world is messy, and human nature often complicates even the best-laid plans. Let’s look at that financial institution example.

First, “self-organization” isn’t about anarchy. It’s about empowered teams taking ownership and using collective intelligence to decide the best way forward, within agreed-upon principles. In a hierarchical environment, you need to establish clear decision-making authority within the team, ideally with a Scrum Master facilitating this process. Transparency is paramount. Regular team meetings, clear communication channels, and open dialogue are crucial. This isn’t about dismantling the hierarchy, but empowering individuals within the structure to make effective decisions. You need to actively build trust by demonstrating that decisions made by the team are valued and respected.

Regarding compliance and speed, the key is to embed regulatory requirements into the Agile process, not as an afterthought. This means having compliance experts embedded within the team, not as gatekeepers, but as active participants in the sprint planning and review processes. Clear acceptance criteria for compliance must be defined at the story level, ensuring that every increment meets the standards. This necessitates meticulous documentation and traceability, but in a structured way that integrates into the iterative approach, not as an external burden.

A mid-project regulatory change? This is where the iterative nature shines. Agile methodologies allow for adaptation. The sprint cycle provides an opportunity to re-evaluate priorities, refine user stories, and adjust the plan accordingly. It might mean shifting priorities, potentially delaying certain features, but the key is to communicate openly and transparently with all stakeholders, including regulatory bodies, to manage expectations and maintain alignment.

Unforeseen delays caused by market downturns or personnel issues are part of the project lifecycle. Agile’s adaptability is key here. The team should be prepared to adjust the sprint backlog, potentially re-prioritize tasks, and communicate openly about the challenges. Having contingency plans in place, and clear communication channels with stakeholders regarding potential delays, is crucial.

Measuring success in a trading platform project requires a mix of traditional financial metrics and Agile indicators. Traditionally, you might look at return on investment (ROI), cost savings, and operational efficiency. Agile-specific metrics might include the velocity of the development team, the number of defects found, and lead time for new features to be released. Crucially, you need a way to track how the development process itself is evolving – is the team becoming more efficient, are they better able to adapt to change?

Pressure to deliver a perfect product? This is often a cultural challenge, not a technical one. An iterative approach can’t deliver perfection on the first go. Instead, focus on delivering a working product in each increment, and continuously improving upon it. Set realistic expectations that the product will evolve through the project.

Maintaining momentum and avoiding burnout in a demanding environment requires proactive measures like regular team check-ins, stress management programs, and clear communication of expectations. Teams need to be empowered to take breaks and prioritize their well-being. The Scrum Master plays a vital role in facilitating these aspects of the project.

In summary, successful Agile implementation in this context isn’t just about adopting the practices; it’s about embedding the principles into the entire organizational structure, adapting to change, and prioritizing communication and transparency. The focus is on creating a resilient and adaptive team that understands the project’s unique challenges and proactively finds solutions. Real-world applications require more than just theory; they require practical strategies that address the unique complexities of the specific environment.

Or, in short:

• Why do Agile transformations often fail? Because teams adopt practices without embracing core Agile principles.
• Is Agile micromanagement or team empowerment? Agile empowers teams through self-organization and collaboration.
• Can Agile work in rigid organizations with legacy systems? Yes, with leadership support, cultural change, and incremental adaptation.
• How does Agile address real-world challenges like compliance and resistance? By embedding requirements early and adapting plans transparently.

Where do we use it?

Here are a few thoughts.

• Academic Peer Review Simulation. What if we simulate a conversation between an academic author and a peer reviewer? This can help researchers anticipate feedback, improve their manuscripts, and understand the peer review process more deeply.
• Educational Content Development Workshop: What if we have two instructional designers collaborate on creating engaging e-learning modules? Maybe one focusing on pedagogical strategies and learning outcomes while the other focuses on multimedia integration and interactive elements?
• Customer Service Training Module: What if we simulate interactions between a customer support agent and different customer personas? This could help train agents to handle inquiries with empathy and efficiency. (One of our clients is already looking for this in the fraud space.)
• Content Localization and Cultural Sensitivity Dialogue: What if a translator and a cultural consultant discuss content adaptation for international markets? We could avoid situations like Ford Pinto. (Pinto translates to genitals in Brazilian.)
• Virtual Conference Panel: What if we host a mock panel on “The Future of Digital”? One panelist could predict radical changes, and another could take a more cautious approach. I can imagine curated content from these being as interesting as human debates.
• Product Development Brainstorm Session: What if a product manager and a developer discuss features for a new data analytics platform? The manager could focus on market demand, and the developer on technical feasibility.
• Data Annotation and Quality Assurance Discussion: What if a data annotator and a QA specialist review a dataset for a machine learning project? The annotator explains labeling choices and challenges faced. The QA specialist identifies inconsistencies and proposes a better solution.

More conversation is effectively more brain-power for LLMs. (That’s how Chain of Thought works.) LLM Dialogues are one way we could leverage that.