A lie means intent. A lie means a desire to appear correct, or to deceive. You are 100% incorrect: The robot NEVER lies. The whole point is, if it looks like a lie to a human, it's because the data does not provide enough nuance to choose between the desired output and garbage.

“Well, he doesn’t want to display a lot of information, so let’s tuck the widgets in the upper corners and center the important stuff at the bottom.”

The robot has no internal monologue, and does not make any intermediate statement such as this one to guide its own "thinking", obviously. More generally, during the conversion of your prompt and its data into output, there is no distillation of information down into guidelines like the line above that are then re-applied in a process anything like conscious design. That is absolutely not the way it works.

It only looks this way to an observing human. For our part, we attempt to understand something that we plainly have no hope at all of truly grasping: A process of multiplying and dividing trillions of numbers all in parallel faster than anything our senses hope to track. The very idea of grasping something like this process is a step directly down a path of lies, because of how we define grasping itself, which involves understanding some specific application of some generalized concepts -- and the robot does not work that way AT ALL! (In fact the term "robot" itself is an awful term to use for these constructs.)

Fun universe we're entering, yeah?

I like to think of it this way: LLMs are like buckets of water. We form phrases to give them, describing what we want, and these are like rocks. We pitch the rock into the water and some of it splashes out. That's the output.

What happens in the bucket? Thinking? Good lord no. Lots and lots of particles interacting? Definitely.