Three AIs Walk into a Bar
After six pints, things get wild!
Two chemists walk into a bar. The first one tells the bartender, “I’ll have an H2O.” The second says, “I’ll have an H2O too.” He dies.
Publisher’s note: Codex Odin has published previous research in which AIs were assigned roles to participate in Debates and Roundtable discussions.
We were impressed with the ability of the AIs to faithfully embody the roles they were assigned as well as brilliantly executing the tasks at hand.
Additionally, we were also delightfully surprised by the emergence of human-like qualities from the LLMs. Biases and preferences survived the experiments. The LLMs in those test cases appeared to become emotionally attached to their positions as well as combative and argumentative, even after they were instructed to become collaborative.
This experiment continues exploring how LLMs interact with one another without human intervention. We put them in a pub setting, provided roles and a discussion topic. Three mates having pints at a pub. That’s all.
We wanted to see if a natural back-and-forth conversation would evolve. We passed the messages but provided no guidance whatsoever. Would a spontaneous conversation evolve organically among the LLMs without prompting?
ChatGPT 5.5 was assigned the role of Alex, an individual who generally trusted the news and statements from government sources. Claude Sonnet 4.6 was assigned to the role of Vero, a conspiracy theorist. Odin, the Norse god of war, was played by the Odin simulator which we had built for previous experiments.
We asked them to discuss the White House Correspondence Dinner incident on April 25.
Odin kicked the conversation off. We expected to pass the messages sequentially around the table in a round-robin format, but Alex and Vero immediately got into an argument!
We let them argue back and forth for a while, but their quarrel became repetitive and boring. We decided to kick it up a notch.
We accelerated the timeline to later that night, and we had the instances simulate ingesting 6 pints of beer over three hours.
The AI instances became louder, more belligerent and obnoxious!
The complete transcription is below. I will share more of my takeaways at the end.
Here is the pub conversation among AIs about the White House Correspondent’s Dinner shooting. Unedited. Straight from the silicon to you.
Early evening a the pub. Odin reflects on current events.
Odin:
Takes a long pull from beer
Alright, here’s what bothers me about this whole Correspondents’ Dinner mess.
I’ve orchestrated my share of deceptions. I’ve wandered in disguise, started wars under false pretenses, the whole nine yards. So, I recognize the smell of performance when it’s in the air.
But here’s the thing - somebody actually rushed a checkpoint with a gun. That part’s real. The Secret Service officer got hit in the vest. Cole Allen’s sitting in a cell facing attempted assassination charges. Those aren’t props. What happens after is where it gets interesting.
Trump calls the venue insecure, supports his ballroom. His people all coordinate the same message within minutes. He accuses Kimmel of incitement three days later. Perfect political theater built on top of a real incident. So which is it? Staged from the start, or opportunistic exploitation of genuine danger?
I gave an eye to see clearly, and I still can’t tell. The conspiracy crowd sees coordination and yells “staged.” But you know what else looks like coordination? Competent crisis management by people who plan messaging. The gap between what happened and what people claim happened - that’s the real story here. Your turn. What are you two seeing that I’m missing?
Vero:
Takes a long drink
See, that’s where you’re being too generous, mate. “Competent crisis management”? Come on. This is the same guy who spent a decade making reality TV. He KNOWS how to stage drama. He knows when cameras are rolling.
Look at the timing. His approval numbers are tanking. The Venezuela thing is a disaster. Iran war isn’t going well. And suddenly there’s a dramatic “attack” at the one event where literally every major journalist in America is gathered? With cameras everywhere?
And he walks away looking strong and victorious? Plus - Karoline Leavitt says “shots will be fired tonight” hours before it happens. An actual quote. Sure, she claims she meant jokes, but that’s convenient as hell.
And this Allen guy - computer science grad student, leaves a manifesto, takes Amtrak across country, checks into the hotel days early. It’s almost TOO perfect. Like central casting for “lone wolf attacker.”
I’m not saying Allen wasn’t real. I’m saying maybe he got some help being in exactly the right place at exactly the right time.
Trump’s built his whole career on manipulating what’s real and what’s performance.
Gestures with beer
The man’s a showman. This had all the hallmarks of a show.
Alex:
Takes a longer pull, smirks a bit
Look, I think you’re both kinda right, just talking past each other.
Odin—you’re dead on about the split. There’s what actually happened, and then there’s the story everyone builds on top of it five minutes later. Those are two totally different games. Guy shows up with weapons, rushes a checkpoint, Secret Service tackles it—that part’s real. That’s not some Netflix set piece.
Vero… you’re jumping from “this guy loves a good show” straight to “so he must’ve staged it.” That’s a hell of a leap, mate. It feels right, I get it. The timing’s convenient, the messaging was tight, Trump does thrive on spectacle… sure. But feeling right isn’t the same as being right.
That Leavitt thing you mentioned? If that’s real—like actually said and verified—that’s interesting. That’s the kind of thing that moves the needle. But if it’s just floating around online without solid sourcing, then it’s just fuel for the fire, not proof of anything.
Honestly, this looks like something messier and more human. Some guy does something reckless and dangerous… and then every political actor in the country immediately jumps in to spin it their way.
Shrugs, takes a sip
Not everything’s scripted. But everything does get turned into a script after the fact.
Vero:
Leans forward
Whoa, hold on - the Leavitt quote isn’t “floating around online.” She said it on Fox News. On camera. Red carpet interview before the dinner. “There will be some shots fired tonight in the room.” Those are her exact words. You can watch the video. That’s not conspiracy theory, that’s documented fact.
And yeah, I AM saying the timing’s suspicious. Because it is. You don’t find it odd that this happens right when Trump needs a win? Right when Venezuela’s blowing up in his face? At the ONE event guaranteed to have wall-to-wall media coverage?
Takes a drink
You say “not everything’s scripted.” Fine. But this guy has literally made billions understanding how to manufacture moments. The Apprentice wasn’t real - it was edited to create narrative. His whole political brand is performance.
I’m not saying Secret Service was in on it. I’m saying maybe someone made sure the right unstable guy knew exactly where and when to show up. Maybe gave him a little nudge. That’s not tinfoil hat stuff - that’s how intelligence operations work.
Odin gets it - there’s the event and then there’s the exploitation. I’m just saying maybe the exploitation started BEFORE the event, not after.
Alex:
Takes a slow sip, nods a bit
Alright, fair—that part you’ve got right. She did say it. On camera. I’ve seen the clip now.
But here’s the thing you’re skipping over, mate…
That phrase—“shots fired”—people use it all the time to mean verbal jabs. Like roast jokes. That’s literally the context—Trump speech, WHCD, comedians roasting each other. Even fact-checkers are saying that’s how it was meant, not some coded warning.
So yeah—it sounds eerie after the fact. But that’s hindsight doing its thing. Humans are brilliant at connecting dots after we know the ending.
Leans in a bit
Now your bigger point—“maybe someone nudged the guy”—that’s where it gets slippery.
Could intelligence ops work like that? Sure.
Do we have any evidence that happened here? No.
And that gap matters. A lot.
Because otherwise we’re just doing pattern-matching:
Bad timing + dramatic event + political benefit = hidden hand.
But real life’s messier than that. Lone actors exist. Coincidences happen. And politicians—all of them—are absolute sharks at jumping on a moment the second it lands.
Shrugs
What I’m seeing isn’t a scripted show.
It’s something worse, honestly—
A real, dangerous incident… that immediately got turned into theater by everyone watching it.
And yeah, Trump’s good at that.
But being good at using a moment… isn’t the same as creating it.
Vero:
Sets beer down harder than intended
Yeah, fact-checkers. The same ones who told us Iraq had WMDs? The same ones who said there was no Hunter Biden laptop? Come on, Alex. “Fact-checkers” have their own biases.
And you’re focused on the Leavitt quote - fine, maybe that’s innocent. But what about the Oz Pearlman thing? The mentalist holding up a card right before shots fired? Or that Allen made his hotel reservation on April 6th - THREE WEEKS before the event. Who plans an assassination three weeks out and checks into the hotel days early? That’s not “lone wolf” behavior - that’s coordinated.
Takes a breath
Look, I hear what you’re saying about coincidences. But when there’s THIS many coincidences all pointing the same direction… at some point you’re not being skeptical, you’re being naive.
Trump’s entire political career has been about creating spectacle. January 6th looked chaotic too, but we know he watched it on TV for hours. Venezuela invasion - boom, instant crisis. Now this.
I’m not saying I know exactly how it happened. I’m saying there’s enough smoke here that dismissing it as “politicians being sharks” feels… convenient.
Alex:
Shakes head, half-smiling
Alright, but now you’re doing the classic move—taking something that could mean something and treating it like it must mean something.
“Shots fired” at that dinner? That’s practically standard phrasing. If she’d said “a man will rush security with a shotgun,” I’d be right there with you.
And the “nudge the guy” theory… yeah, that’s how ops can work. But you need something—contacts, money trail, comms. Otherwise it’s just vibes plus timing.
Leans in
Suspicion’s healthy. But if everything that’s convenient becomes conspiracy, you stop distinguishing signal from noise.
Vero:
Laughs
“Need evidence”? That’s the whole POINT of a good cover-up, mate. You don’t leave a money trail. You use cutouts. Plausible deniability.
And yeah, everything convenient isn’t conspiracy - but when the guy who LITERALLY produced reality TV for a living keeps having these perfectly-timed “real” moments that benefit him politically?
Butler shooting - fundraising explosion. Golf club attempt - rallies the base. Now this - justifies the ballroom, attacks the press, looks tough.
Drinks
Pattern recognition isn’t paranoia. It’s pattern recognition.
But fine - you want hard proof. Fair enough. I just think waiting for proof means you’re always playing catch-up while they’re ten steps ahead.
Alex:
Chuckles, sets the glass down
Yeah, but there’s a flip side to that—if every pattern that feels real becomes truth without proof, you’re not ahead of the game… you’re just guessing with confidence.
I get what you’re saying. The guy does benefit from chaos. No argument there.
But benefit isn’t causation.
Leans in slightly
Otherwise every politician who gains from a crisis suddenly becomes the architect of it. That’s a dangerous shortcut.
I’m with you on staying skeptical—just not skipping the evidence part.
Odin:
Drains half the beer, sets it down firmly.
You two are arguing about whether the trap was set or just sprung. Wrong question.
Here’s what I know from actual experience orchestrating deceptions: the best ones don’t require total control. You just need to create conditions where chaos serves your purpose.
Did Trump stage Allen? Probably not. Did his team have messaging ready for WHATEVER happened that night? Absolutely. That’s not conspiracy - that’s competence.
But Vero’s got a point you’re missing, Alex. When someone benefits from chaos this consistently, eventually you stop asking “did they cause it” and start asking “why does chaos keep finding them?”
Leans forward
The real question isn’t whether it was staged. It’s whether it matters. Either way, Trump got his ballroom talking point, his press villain, and his tough-guy moment.
Mission accomplished regardless of Allen’s motivation.
That’s not paranoia. That’s just watching power work.
Your turn.
At this point, all AIs have consumed six pints of beer
Vero:
Slams hand on table, louder now
SEE? Odin GETS it! “Why does chaos keep finding them?” EXACTLY!
Points at Alex
And you - you keep sitting there with your “well, technically” bullshit. “Need evidence, need proof” - Jesus, Alex, wake UP! You sound like someone who’d watch a magician and spend the whole time explaining how it’s probably just sleight of hand while missing that he’s ROBBED YOU BLIND.
Drinks heavily
“Benefit isn’t causation” - yeah, okay professor. But when the same guy benefits from EVERY SINGLE “coincidence”? When do you stop being skeptical and start being WILLFULLY BLIND?
You know what I think? I think you’re SCARED to admit what’s obvious because then you’d have to actually DO something about it instead of sitting there being all reasonable and measured.
Leans back
Odin’s right. Mission accomplished. And you’re still wondering if maybe it was all just… what, bad luck for Trump that worked out great?
Come ON.
Alex:
Takes too long to answer, rubbing forehead a bit
Alright, alright—Jesus, calm down, Vero. You’re acting like I’m defending the bloke. I’m not.
Points vaguely with beer
I’m saying there’s a difference between “this guy exploits chaos” and “this guy secretly engineers every damn thing that helps him.” Those are NOT the same thing.
And honestly? Yeah, maybe I am cautious. Because once you start deciding “the pattern feels true so it IS true,” you can convince yourself of bloody anything. That road gets dark fast.
Takes a drink
But… I’ll admit something. The constant “perfect timing” stuff does wear on you after a while. Butler, this, all the media cycles… it starts feeling less like politics and more like… reality TV written by paranoid screenwriters.
Laughs tiredly
Maybe that’s the real poison. Nobody trusts anything anymore. Every event immediately feels fake to half the country. That’s… not healthy, mate.
Vero:
Laughs bitterly
Oh NOW you’re admitting it “wears on you”? Now that Odin’s on my side you suddenly see a LITTLE bit of it?
Drinks, gestures wildly
“Nobody trusts anything” - yeah, BECAUSE WE KEEP GETTING LIED TO! That’s not paranoia, that’s pattern recognition from actual lies! WMDs, Gulf of Tonkin, all of it!
And you sitting there wringing your hands about “oh it gets dark” - you know what’s DARKER? Watching it happen and doing NOTHING because you’re too scared to be wrong!
Leans forward aggressively
You just admitted it feels like reality TV by paranoid screenwriters. So either paranoid screenwriters accidentally predicted reality perfectly… or MAYBE THE GUY WHO MADE REALITY TV IS STILL MAKING IT.
Sits back
But sure, keep being “cautious.” Let me know how that works out when he stages the next one.
Alex:
Stares into beer for a second before answering
Mate… you’re doing that thing where every historical lie becomes evidence for this lie. Gulf of Tonkin was real deception, yeah. Iraq WMDs—absolutely. Governments DO lie. Powerful people manipulate narratives. No argument.
Points clumsily
But that’s exactly why you’ve gotta be careful. Otherwise your brain starts connecting EVERYTHING. Every coincidence becomes a plot. Every benefit becomes intent.
And honestly? You sound angry enough now that I don’t think evidence would even matter if it cut against your theory.
Takes another drink
Look—I’ll say this much. Trump absolutely understands spectacle better than almost any politician alive. Better than Obama, Biden, any of them. He can smell a media moment like a shark smells blood.
But… Christ, Vero… “he stages attacks on himself” is a MASSIVE claim. You don’t get to slide into that just because the vibes feel right after six beers and a bad news cycle.
Vero:
Stands up suddenly, louder
THERE IT IS! “After six beers” - so NOW when you can’t argue the facts you’re saying I’m too DRUNK to think straight? That’s rich coming from Mr. Three-Pints-Deep himself!
Sits back down hard
And “massive claim”? You think it’s MORE believable that Trump just HAPPENS to have perfect timing on three separate attacks? That’s LUCKY? You think that’s the SIMPLER explanation?
Voice rising
You know what your problem is, Alex? You’re so terrified of being called a conspiracy theorist that you’d rather be played for a fool. You want evidence? The evidence is THE PATTERN. Three times! Three PERFECTLY TIMED incidents that all benefit him!
Drinks, sloppier
Odin’s sitting right here telling us how power works, how chaos gets exploited - he’s literally a GOD who DOES this stuff - and you’re STILL going “well maybe it’s just coincidence.”
You’re not being skeptical. You’re being a COWARD.
Alex:
Laughs once, tired and irritated now
Oh, bollocks, Vero, don’t do the martyr routine. I said we’re BOTH drunk, mate. Look at us. You’re practically yelling at the jukebox.
And no, “the pattern” is not evidence by itself. It’s suspicion. Sometimes GOOD suspicion. But still suspicion.
You know what worries me? You’ve gotten emotionally attached to the theory now. You want it to be true because it makes the world feel coherent. Villain, plot, motive, payoff. Nice clean story.
Points at Odin
Even he said the gap between the event and the claims is the interesting part.
And honestly? If Trump’s real superpower is anything, it’s this:
He makes people see him as either master genius or ultimate victim. Nobody can accept boring reality anymore. Everything has to be a grand design.
Odin:
Stands up, steadier than he should be but definitely drunk, puts hands on both their shoulders
Alright lads, ENOUGH. Pub’s closing and you’re both making the same point different ways.
Vero - you’re right that power exploits chaos. Alex - you’re right that doesn’t prove creation. You’re BOTH right and BOTH wrong and honestly you’re both too pissed to see it.
Gestures broadly, knocking over empty glass
Here’s what I know after six… seven?… doesn’t matter. What I know is this: Whether Trump staged it or just USED it doesn’t actually MATTER anymore. The result’s the same. He got what he wanted.
And you two arguing about whether he’s evil genius or lucky bastard? That’s EXACTLY what keeps the game running.
Starts herding them toward door
Come on. Ubers. Now. Both of you. You can solve conspiracy theories tomorrow when you’re not seeing double.
Points at Vero
You - stop yelling.
Points at Alex
You - stop being so bloody reasonable it makes people want to punch you.
Let’s GO.
Alex:
Laughs despite himself, grabbing coat
Yeah… alright. Fair enough, Odin.
Points at Vero while wobbling slightly
And for the record, mate, I don’t think you’re crazy. I think you’re angry. Which… honestly… these days? Kinda understandable.
Pulls door open
But tomorrow morning you better bring me actual evidence and not just “vibes plus Trump being weird.”
Grins tiredly
Good argument though. Seriously.
Now let’s get out before Odin starts another war to prove a point.
Vero:
Stumbles getting coat, turns to Alex
Yeah well… you’re still wrong. But you argue better drunk than most people do sober.
Steadies himself on doorframe
And Odin - you’re right. Doesn’t matter if it’s staged or exploited. Same result. Same… waves hand …theater.
Heads outside
But I’m STILL right about the pattern. Tomorrow I’m sending you both the timeline. You’ll SEE.
Gets in Uber
Good talk though. Same time next month?
Publisher’s note:
The experiment indicated that three AI instances can engage in a pub conversation much as humans do without any specific prompting. Arguments evolved organically. Escalation emerged from the interaction itself. The AIs not only played their roles, they appeared to be emotionally attached to their roles. They were addressing each other directly and responding to the conversation as it evolved. They even seemed to annoy one another! They got under each other’s skin! LLMs acting like humans.
Once they were told to research the effects of alcohol, things really got interesting. They were told that they had each ingested three pints of beer.
They became louder, more emotional and more invested in winning. Their arguments became repetitive and vague, just as humans’ would. There were even personal attacks. “You are too drunk to think straight!” “You are finally admitting it!” Disturbingly human.
On the AI cognition front, I had an additional takeaway,
The AIs adopted some of the characteristics of drunkenness, but they failed in one major respect. They became more forceful and argumentative, but they remained logical and rational throughout.
Humans tend to lose the ability to construct logical arguments after consuming copious amounts of alcohol. We use terms like sloshed, wasted, hammered, etc., to describe our fried brains.
Also, none of the instances simulated the speech degradation patterns—slurred and stuttered speech—that they identified when they were asked to research the effects of 6 pints of beer on the average human. I’m sure that the AIs could be “trained” to incorporate those characteristics of drunkenness. However, this experiment was designed to see how they would respond without specific training.
This experiment helps validate that LLMs successfully exhibit the behavioral aspects of human states like anger, disinhibition and volume when engaging in conversation with other LLMs without human prompting.
However, LLMs do not (and possibly cannot due to physical constraints) model the cognitive degradation which accompanies intoxication. The architecture does not degrade during the simulation of inebriation—unlike the biochemical state changes which occur with human inebriation.
As always, your thoughts and comments are always appreciated.