Dialogue helps you discover and intensify the starting taste.

It's a coevolutionary process with both sides of the conversation moving the idea forward.

A dialogue can create better results, even if it's a dialogue between two "boring" thinkers.

LLMs can have more conversations, even with other LLMs, to find interesting non-centroid beliefs.

For example: have one LLM participant play the role of generating ad copy. Have another one play the role of a skeptical consumer reacting to the copy, in a loop.

They start off with boring centroid ideas, with just a bit of randomness.

Then the "dialogue" helps intensify the random noise into the fullest, most resilient formulation of itself.

The LLM distribution stays the same (the model doesn't change); the context drives them off-centroid.

The generator/critic pattern.

Generate a bunch of stuff, select, and then amplify the ones that work.