Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GirlfriendGPT – OSS AI Companion

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 213 posts

Re: GirlfriendGPT – OSS AI Companion

#61

Post by surgical_fire »

bheadmaster wrote: post #18
surgical_fire wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it already is removing human interactions from my life This is the best feature of ChatGPT for me, and the reason I pay for it.

> This is the best feature of ChatGPT for me, and the reason I pay for it. While I completely understand this sentiment, I would be wary of Service as a Software Substitute being your alternative to human contact. If we start feeling (something akin to) genuine human connection to a service, the company providing the service has a large amount leverage over us. The scene from Blade Runner 2049 comes to mind. Addition…

> If we start feeling (something akin to) genuine human connection to a service

I don't. I see it as a tool, and I treat it as a tool. I don't have with it any more of a human connection than I have with IntelliJ where I type my code or the Linux Mint where it runs. Meaning - I like the tool, but that's about it.

On the other hand, I also don't have any genuine human connection with the random humans I happened to interact on the internet. In a sense, they are just text on a screen, and could be bots for all I care.

Re: GirlfriendGPT – OSS AI Companion

#62

Post by quickthrower2 »

PokemonNoGo wrote: post #30
thomasfromcdnjs wrote: post #16

I made a Tinder bot in the first month of GPT-3's public API release. The ethics made me squirm so I always asked for permission to turn it on and told people when it was on and off. The models moral alignment was way more "friendly" back then so turned it into some pretty saucy chats. The model was better than me at replying, still single though. (It was simply holding onto the last 10-20 messages and injecting it i…

If they knew they were talking to a bot why did they do it? Did they say?

Sounds like a joke maybe?

Re: GirlfriendGPT – OSS AI Companion

#63

Post by TeMPOraL »

cmilton wrote: post #52
TeMPOraL wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's be more precise by what we mean by "human interactions" / "human contact" here. For example: - An alternative outlet for venting/intimate conversations than your friends/spouse? I can see a problem growing here. - A replacement/substitute for a therapist? I doubt even GPT-4 can do that job better than actual therapist (especially when face to face, not over Zoom), but there are many scenarios where ChatGPT woul…

>However, some people (myself included) already have difficulty with this kind of interaction, so ChatGPT here is strictly positive Do you think this technology is going to make it more difficult for people like yourself?

People like me have an issue asking people questions specifically because people-related reasons. LLMs aren't people (yet), so those reasons don't apply. So in this context, the technology is making things easier for us.

Re: GirlfriendGPT – OSS AI Companion

#66

Post by cmilton »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #63
cmilton wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>However, some people (myself included) already have difficulty with this kind of interaction, so ChatGPT here is strictly positive Do you think this technology is going to make it more difficult for people like yourself?

People like me have an issue asking people questions specifically because people-related reasons . LLMs aren't people (yet), so those reasons don't apply. So in this context, the technology is making things easier for us.

Thank you. I wholeheartedly agree that it can make things easier. Easy in the short term may not be beneficial in the long would be my only concern.

Re: GirlfriendGPT – OSS AI Companion

#67

Post by danwee »

There is something I don't understand (from a tech point of view). Why call it GirlfriendGPT if 99% of the code is generic code for a fancy whatever-you-want-it-to-be chatGPT? The only thing that makes the answers "girlfriend-like" is this file https://github.com/EniasCailliau/GirlfriendGPT/blob/main/src...

So, it should be tremendously easy to turn GirlfriendGPT into "BestFriendGPT" or "LinusTorvaldsGPT" or whatever by just modifying the prompt, right? I know, I know, perhaps duplication is cheaper than (the wrong) abstraction but my tech-side tells me: refactor the common thing out now! : D

Re: GirlfriendGPT – OSS AI Companion

#68

Post by wsc981 »

> Memories: Soon, the AI will have the capability to remember past interactions, improving conversational context and depth.

Not sure if this is a good idea. You say something wrong one time and whenever there’s an argument she will bring it up again.

Re: GirlfriendGPT – OSS AI Companion

#70

Post by 0xfffafaCrash »

danwee wrote: post #67

There is something I don't understand (from a tech point of view). Why call it GirlfriendGPT if 99% of the code is generic code for a fancy whatever-you-want-it-to-be chatGPT? The only thing that makes the answers "girlfriend-like" is this file https://github.com/EniasCailliau/GirlfriendGPT/blob/main/src... So, it should be tremendously easy to turn GirlfriendGPT into "BestFriendGPT" or "LinusTorvaldsGPT" or whatever…

GirlfriendGPT is more controversial. Controversy does well in the attention economy.
Post reply on HN