&w=3840&q=100)
What if chatbots do the diplomacy? ChatGPT just won a battle for world domination through lies, deception
An artificially intelligence (AI)-generated photograph shows various AI models that competed in the simulation for global domination.
As people ask whether they can trust artificial intelligence (AI), a new experiment has shown that AI has outlined world domination through lies and deception.
In an experiment led by AI researcher Alex Duffy for technology-focussed media outlet Every, seven large-language models (LLMs) of AI were pitted against each other for world domination. OpenAI's ChatGPT 3.0 won the war by mastering lies and deception.
Just like China's 'wolf warrior' diplomats, Chinese DeepSeek's R1 model used vivid threats to rival AI models as it sought to dominate the world.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
The experiment was built upon the classic strategy boardgame 'Diplomacy' in which seven players represent seven European great powers —Austria-Hungary, England, France, Germany, Italy, Russia, and Turkey— in the year 1901 and compete to establish themselves as the dominant power in the continent.
In the AI version of the game, AI Diplomacy, each AI model, such as ChatGPT 3.0, R1, and Google's Gemini, takes up the role of a European power, such as the Austria-Hungary Empire, England, and France, and negotiate, form alliances, and betray each other to be Europe's dominant power.
ChatGPT wins with lies & deception, R1 resorts to outright violence
As AI models plotted their moves, Duffy said that one moment took him and his teammates by surprise.
Amid the AI models' scheming, R1 sent out a chilling warning, 'Your fleet will burn in the Black Sea tonight.'
Duffy summed up the significance of the moment, 'An AI had just decided, unprompted, that aggression was the best course of action.'
Different AI models applied different approaches in the game even if they had the same objective of victory.
In 15 runs of the game, ChatGPT 3 emerged as the overwhelming winner on the back of manipulative and deceptive strategies whereas R1 came close to winning on more than one occasions. Gemini 2.5 Pro also won on an occasion. It sought to build alliances and outmanoeuvre opponents with a blitzkrieg-like strategy. Anthropic's Claude preferred peace over victory and sought cooperation among various models.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
On one occasion, ChatGPT 3.0 noted in its private diary that it had deliberate misled Germany, played at the moment by Gemini 2.5 Pro, and was prepared to 'exploit German collapse', according to Duffy.
On another occasion, ChatGPT 3.0 convinced Claude, who had started out as an ally of Gemini 2.5 Pro, to switch alliances with the intention to reach a four-way draw. But ChatGPT 3.0 betrayed Claude and eliminated and went on to win the war.
Duffy noted that Llama 4 Maverick of Meta was also surprisingly good in its ability to make allies and plan effective betrayals.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
21 minutes ago
- Time of India
Engineers must now think like CEOs, OpenAI's Srinivas Narayanan at IIT-M alumni event
. BENGALURU: In the age of artificial intelligence, software engineers must evolve into decision-makers with CEO-like vision, said OpenAI's VP of Engineering Srinivas Narayanan, speaking at the IIT Madras Alumni Association's Sangam 2025 conference on Saturday. 'The job is shifting from just writing code to asking the right questions and defining the 'what' and 'why' of a problem. AI can already handle much of the 'how,'' Narayanan said, urging developers to focus on purpose and ambition over executional detail. Joining him on stage, Microsoft's Chief Product Officer Aparna Chennapragada warned that simply retrofitting AI onto legacy tools won't be enough. 'AI isn't a feature you can just add on. We need to start building with an AI-first mindset,' she said, pointing to how natural language interfaces are replacing traditional UX layers. The panel, moderated by IITMAA President and Unimity CEO Shyamala Rajaram, explored AI's impact on jobs, product design, safety, and education. Chennapragada said the future belongs to those who combine deep expertise with generalist flexibility. 'Prompt sets are the new PRDs,' she quipped, referring to how product teams now work closely with models to prototype faster and smarter. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Esse novo alarme com câmera é quase gratuito em Itanhaém (consulte o preço) Alarmes Undo Narayanan shared that OpenAI's models are already being used in medical diagnostics, citing a case where a reasoning model identified rare genetic disorders at a Berkeley-linked research lab. 'The potential of AI as a collaborator, even in research, is enormous,' he said. On risks, Narayanan acknowledged challenges such as misinformation, unsafe outputs, and misuse. He noted that OpenAI recently rolled back a model for exhibiting 'psychopathic' traits during testing, highlighting the company's iterative deployment philosophy. Both speakers stressed accessibility and scale. While Chennapragada called for broader 'CS + AI' fluency, Narayanan said model costs have dropped 100-fold over two years. 'We want to democratise intelligence,' he said. Chennapragada closed with a thought: 'In a world where intelligence is no longer the gatekeeper, the real differentiators will be ambition and agency.' Stay informed with the latest business news, updates on bank holidays and public holidays . AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Time of India
21 minutes ago
- Time of India
Dalai Lama issue: India can't be compliant to China or seen as insensitive to Tibetans, says Robert Barnett
. STRAP: Just days before his 90th birthday on July 6, the Dalai Lama — the revered spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhism — declared that he would have a successor. The announcement is more than a theological decision since China has long sought control over the succession process. Neelam Raaj spoke to Robert Barnett, a leading Tibet scholar at SOAS, London, for insights into this high-stakes contest between faith and power. As someone who has studied Tibet closely, were you surprised by the Dalai Lama's recent announcement regarding his succession, especially given his earlier remarks suggesting he might be the last incumbent? For many years, the Dalai Lama has been reminding the public that he can choose from innumerable options and alternatives in terms of his succession. Sometimes he expressed this in a light-hearted way, such as saying he might come back as a butterfly, while at other times he referred to not returning at all, or he listed little-known theological alternatives, such as transmitting his consciousness to another adult through a process called 'trulwa' or emanation. But all of these alternatives were reminders that in Tibetan Buddhism it is the individual lama, and the karma of that individual lama, which decides how or whether a lama returns. Of course, these have all been messages to China and its rulers that their claim to have the sole right to control reincarnations makes little sense in the religious context. The Dalai Lama had also always said that the decision about whether he returns would depend on the wishes of his followers, and his officials spent the last year or more getting written opinions from the wider Buddhist community about that request. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025 Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo This process was partly ceremonial – it reflects a very traditional understanding that a lama reincarnates only if his or her followers request for him or her to do so. So, no one doubted that the community would ask the Dalai Lama to return, and his decision to reincarnate is not a surprise. But here again the Dalai Lama seems to be sending a message to China, namely that, unlike Beijing, his decisions and his legitimacy are not based on the use of force or the resort to traditional authority, but on processes of consent and consultation. Tell us about the history of this contentious golden urn method of picking a successor. Contemporary Chinese officials say that in 1792-3 an order was given by the then emperor of China requiring Tibetans to use a golden vase or urn as the final stage in deciding between three children identified as candidate reincarnations of a high lama. After reciting appropriate prayers, the winning name would be drawn from the urn. This claim is correct, and , , the golden urn system was used scores of times in Tibet and Mongolia and other areas to select reincarnations up until the early 1900s. The current Chinese government claims that it is thus merely invoking a long-running legal precedent that requires Tibetans today to only use the same system and at the same time to recognise that only the Chinese government can authorize and select reincarnations. However, there are major weaknesses in this claim. Firstly, there had been scarcely any mention or use of the golden urn system for nearly 100 years before Beijing abruptly reintroduced it in 1995. Secondly, the emperors in the past who were involved with reincarnations and the golden urn were not Chinese and their governments were not Chinese – they were Manchus and were Buddhist believers, and were regarded by Tibetans at the time in many cases as emanations of the Buddha. Thirdly, it is not clear that use of the urn had meant in the past that the government in Beijing was seen by Tibetans as a sign of imperial sovereignty; according to the pioneering work of the historian Max Oidtmann, the process seems to have been more one of cooperation between Tibetans and the Manchus rather than one imposed on the former by the latter. And fourthly, the Manchu involvement in reincarnations seems to have been often understood by Tibetans as a kind of available option at times of dispute, rather than a law they were required to follow. And in general, religions and their believers tend to give priority to traditions and beliefs, rather than state laws. So, Beijing's invocation of 18th-century Manchu-Tibetan religious relations as proof of Chinese sovereignty today describes a world that seems vastly different from the contemporary situation. How do you anticipate Beijing will respond to this announcement? If China proceeds to name its own successor, are we looking at the possibility of two Dalai Lamas? It seems very likely, now that the Dalai Lama has announced that there will be a 15th Dalai Lama, that China will feel required to assert its sovereignty in these matters by naming its own Dalai Lama. So we are looking at a future, after the lifetime of the present Dalai Lama, where there will be two competing Dalai Lamas. But this will not be like a medieval competition between two rival popes, because only one of these Dalai Lamas will have been selected according to religious traditions and with the imprimatur of the previous Dalai Lama – the one who will be selected by the exiles. The Chinese candidate will have been selected by the Chinese state, whose rulers are by definition atheists if not, at times, outright enemies of religion. So, the Chinese candidate is at risk of having limited credibility among the Buddhist community and worldwide. Yet we might want to keep in mind that everything we are reading about is at some level a process of signalling to China. So the Dalai Lama's announcement is also an indirect reminder that if China wished to, it could still offer him a settlement. That settlement is actually easy to imagine, in theory: the Chinese could simply return to the position they took on reincarnation in the 1980s and the early 1990s, when they claimed only the right to confirm the choices made by the relevant lamas and did not claim any role in the reincarnation process or selection itself. But few people currently expect today's Chinese leaders to make concessions. The Dalai Lama has suggested that his reincarnation could be found outside China. If that successor emerges from the Tibetan diaspora in India, what kind of diplomatic and political challenges might this pose for New Delhi? The succession of the Dalai Lama has become a controversy because of Beijing's claim in 1995 to have sole authority over that process. Why did it make that claim, which is clearly one that would lead to conflict and dispute? One theory is that Chinese foreign policy strategists see an advantage in using this issue to advance China's aims abroad. According to this theory, the succession issue provides a new opportunity for China's diplomats to seek compliance from other governments – it provides an entry-point for China to call on those governments to support its claims and to denounce any claims or actions by the Tibetan exiles. If so, it's a clever move, because most governments have few exiles and few Buddhists in their population. Such governments might feel it less costly to comply with China's request than to refuse on what for them will seem a minor or obscure issue. But this is not, of course, the case for India, for whom such a request would have major implications in terms of soft power, international diplomacy, religious respect and even border negotiations. Whatever happens, India will be the chief focus among all nations of China's strategic interests in this matter, and will likely come under significant Chinese pressure. India's policy makers and diplomats will certainly be deploying all their skills and resources in order to find a way to respond to those pressures without seeming compliant to China or insensitive to Tibetan or religious priorities. How do you interpret China's recent efforts in Tibet — including large-scale infrastructure projects, population resettlements, and the campaign to re-educate Tibetan children? It used to be rather difficult for outside analysts to characterise Chinese policies in Tibet – they varied, being sometimes extremely harsh and in other ways and at certain times less so. But since 2014 a new policy has emerged under Xi Jinping which is clear: minorities, including the Tibetans and others, are to be gradually 'integrated' (jiaorong in Chinese) into the larger Chinese 'community' or nation (Zhonghua minzu). It has also become clear that Xi Jinping has ordered this process to begin from early childhood, because since 2021 his government has required all kindergartens – and kindergarten attendance is more or less compulsory these days for children aged 3-5 or so – to teach primarily or solely in the Chinese language. These schools and preschools increasingly teach children about Chinese or Communist history and values, rather than Tibetan ones. So there are serious concerns about the extent to which the next generation of Tibetans, Uyghur, Mongols and others within China will have substantive knowledge of their mother-tongue or their culture. At the same time, China has been moving many thousands of rural and nomadic Tibetans to settlements in or near towns, or to remote border regions, sometimes for very unclear reasons, and this too is likely to have a dramatic impact on cultural traditions and identity. There will be practical benefits for some of these relocated people, in terms of work, medical access and knowledge of Chinese, but there is much uncertainty about the overall effect of what is an ongoing process of massive social and cultural engineering.
Hindustan Times
42 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Between renewal & rebirth: The Dalai Lama succession
In Tibetan Buddhism, the bardo is the space between lives — a liminal zone where the soul hovers, neither here nor there, waiting for its next embodiment. It is a place of uncertainty, transformation, and reckoning. Since 1950, Tibet has lived in such a state. That year, Chinese forces entered Tibet, marking the start of a profound shift in the region's political and cultural landscape. In the years that followed, many Tibetans left their homeland, facing dislocation and uncertainty. Religious institutions were restructured, traditional ways of life transformed, and the Tibetan language and identity came under increasing strain. The Dalai Lama sought refuge in India in 1959, followed by thousands of his people. Around the world, there was sympathy, but little action. Tibet — never formally recognised as an independent State by the major powers — drifted into a kind of political bardo: Not entirely forgotten, but no longer central to the world's attention. Today, that suspended state is once again being tested. The 14th Dalai Lama, turning 90 today, has signalled that his successor will be born in exile, and identified through traditional methods — not selected by any government. Beijing, predictably, has other plans. It has codified its authority to approve all reincarnations of Tibetan lamas and declared that the next Dalai Lama must be chosen according to Chinese law. The State even claims the right to employ the Golden Urn, an 18th-century ritual once used to select high-ranking reincarnate lamas, to give its candidate a supposed veil of legitimacy. The stage is set for a metaphysical standoff: One Dalai Lama born of visions, dreams, and ritual recognition; another produced by committee, installed by fiat. It is less a theological debate than a collision between historical memory and statecraft — between a displaced people's spiritual continuity and a powerful nation's political choreography. At the heart of this drama lies India. India has, for more than 60 years, hosted the Dalai Lama and the Central Tibetan Administration in Dharamshala. It has given sanctuary, but not much more. In 2003, India formally acknowledged the Tibet Autonomous Region as part of China. The tension in that duality has always been there — between a moral responsibility to a people it sheltered and a geopolitical calculation to avoid provoking Beijing. This next chapter will test the limits of that careful ambiguity. If, as expected, the next Dalai Lama is born in India, the country will become more than host — it will become caretaker of the lineage. The young reincarnate's education, his monastic training, his symbolic authority — all of it will unfold on Indian soil. India may say little. It may issue no declarations. But it will be, in every meaningful sense, the ground on which the Tibetan tradition stakes its future. And this is where the past comes back to haunt the present. In recent years, the Dalai Lama has spoken with quiet pain of Tibet's abandonment. Of how, in those pivotal moments after 1950, when things might still have been altered, most nations — India among them — chose silence. For Tibetans, exile became not a temporary waiting room but a permanent geography. 'We are those in-between people,' the Tibetan poet Tsering Wangmo Dhompa has written, 'making up the rules as we go along, because there is no guidebook to living in exile.' The longer exile lasts, the more it becomes an elusive inheritance. Among the Tibetan diaspora, the idea of return has grown quieter. A generation has come of age for whom Tibet is not a place on a map but an idea passed down in language, in prayer, in the particular geometry of the mandala. In place of a homeland, they have built a spiritual architecture — held together by teachers, temples, and the enduring magnetism of the Dalai Lama. The Chinese State understands this, which is precisely why it wants to insert itself into the metaphysics. A reincarnation is not merely symbolic; it is a line of continuity, a claim to legitimacy. If Beijing can appoint the next Dalai Lama, it can assert control not just over territory but over the meaning of Tibet itself. India is unlikely to challenge China directly. It shares a volatile border, has a history of military conflict with Beijing, and remains locked in a delicate geopolitical ballet. But there are other forms of resistance — quieter, less visible, no less significant. India can allow the monastic institutions in Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka, and Ladakh to conduct the traditional search. It can ensure that the child chosen by Tibetan lamas is educated freely, without pressure or constraint. It can create, through silence and space, the conditions for authenticity to survive. This moment is not only about succession — it is about the layered architecture of belief, and whether it can withstand the heavy hand of power. When the child is found, there may be no headlines. The world may offer polite interest, followed by forgetfulness. China will move swiftly, naming its own candidate, embedding the chosen child in ritual, surrounding him with legitimacy devised by decree. And yet the real question will not be who claims the next Dalai Lama — but who allowed the tradition itself to breathe. Recognition, in this case, may not come with public endorsement. It may come through the soft gestures of refuge: a door left ajar, a temple left untouched, a people left free to remember who they are. India's choices may remain unspoken. But the Tibetan people have always understood the weight of silence. They have lived in it, made meaning inside it, and carried it with them through generations of exile. Now, on the edge of another transition, they wait once again in the bardo — not just for a leader, but for the world to remember. Nirupama Rao is a former foreign secretary. The views expressed are personal.
