> The only question is is the entity interesting and/or correct.
This already falls apart though. There are while categories of things which I find "incorrect" and would take up as an argument with a fellow human. But trying to change the mind of an LLM just feels like a waste of my time.
Instead of wanting to change the mind of the other entity, how about focusing on coming to a mutual understanding of what is "correct"? That way it shouldn't matter much if said entity is human, LLM or dog. Unless you're just arguing to push your "correct" on other humans, with little care about their "correct".
Arguing for the sake of convincing the other person is doomed to inevitable failure, even without the possibility of that person being an LLM.
Arguing for the sake of convincing onlookers reading the conversation is more likely to be effective, and in that case it doesn't matter if the other person is an LLM.
>But trying to change the mind of an LLM just feels like a waste of my time.
It often is with humans as well.