aiqbench analysis
This paper reframes human-AI interaction not as genuine dialogue but as an artifact-mediated exchange of candidate texts, arguing that the illusion of conversation stems from interface design rather than system agency. By rejecting the presupposition of a conversational partner, the authors shift the focus from philosophical puzzles about identity and responsibility to the normative implications of how these sophisticated text generators are designed and adopted. This theoretical reclassification is essential for researchers analyzing the social dynamics, liability frameworks, and ethical boundaries surrounding Large Language Model deployment.
Talking with Language Models
arXiv:2610.09064v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: When we interact with large language models (LLMs), are we having a conversation? They are designed to invite us to treat them as intelligent interlocutors who remember, act, and make commitments. But appearances deceive. We introduce the artifactual stance, a framework that reconceives human-AI interaction as artifact-mediated exchanges of candidate texts. LLM outputs are candidate texts optimized for utility, not utterances bearing meaning or force. LLMs are sophisticated text generators, not speakers. Between sessions, nothing runs; between turns, no one remembers. What persists is a configuration and a transcript. The "conversation" is a user's solo performance, interpretive labour disguised by interface and artifact design. This shift dissolves recent philosophical puzzles. Questions about what 'I' and 'you' refer to in AI exchanges, about whether systems can lie or be held to promises, about the identity of our supposed interlocutors all rest on a false presupposition. There is no speaker behind the screen, hence no one to refer to, no one to hold responsible. What feels like dialogue with someone is interaction with an artifact that generates text at unprecedented scale and fit. By abandoning the conversational framing, we see these systems for what they are: immensely sophisticated artifacts that afford varied uses. The philosophical questions that matter are about the normative underpinnings of design, adoption, authorization, and human practices of use.
Abstract:When we interact with large language models (LLMs), are we having a conversation? They are designed to invite us to treat them as intelligent interlocutors who remember, act, and make commitments. But appearances deceive. We introduce the artifactual stance, a framework that reconceives human-AI interaction as artifact-mediated exchanges of candidate texts. LLM outputs are candidate texts optimized for utility, not utterances bearing meaning or force. LLMs are sophisticated text generators, not speakers. Between sessions, nothing runs; between turns, no one remembers. What persists is a configuration and a transcript. The "conversation" is a user's solo performance, interpretive labour disguised by interface and artifact design. This shift dissolves recent philosophical puzzles. Questions about what 'I' and 'you' refer to in AI exchanges, about whether systems can lie or be held to promises, about the identity of our supposed interlocutors all rest on a false presupposition. There is no speaker behind the screen, hence no one to refer to, no one to hold responsible. What feels like dialogue with someone is interaction with an artifact that generates text at unprecedented scale and fit. By abandoning the conversational framing, we see these systems for what they are: immensely sophisticated artifacts that afford varied uses. The philosophical questions that matter are about the normative underpinnings of design, adoption, authorization, and human practices of use.
Computers and Society (cs.CY); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2610.09064 [cs.CY]
(or arXiv:2610.09064v1 [cs.CY] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.09064 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2026.2745114 Focus to learn more DOI(s) linking to related resources
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 335 words
Related coverage

Academia is for Ambition — Alex Zhang, MIT
Latent Space · Oct 2, 2026
Dyna-2: General Purpose Physical Agents with Hour-Long Autonomy — Jason Ma, Dyna Robotics
Latent Space · Oct 13, 2026

Humanity’s Last Invention — Richard Socher of Recursive
Latent Space · Sep 14, 2026
The J-Space Debate, Agent Swarms, and Pacing Frontier AI - Digital Minds Newsletter #4
LessWrong · Sep 18, 2026