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

Expanding on what we missed with sycophancy

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 297 posts

Re: Expanding on what we missed with sycophancy

#121

Post by kadushka »

kergonath wrote: post #105
kadushka wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never ever thought about needing a therapist. Don't remember anyone in my circle who had ever mentioned it. Similar to how I don't remember anyone going to a palm reader. I'm not trying to diss either profession, I'm sure someone benefits from them, it's just not for me. And I'm sure I'm pretty average in terms of emotional intelligence or psychological issues. Who are all those people who need professional ther…

> I've never ever thought about needing a therapist. Most people don’t need a therapist. But unfortunately, most people need someone empathic they can talk to and who understands them. Modern life is very short on this sort of people, so therapists have to do.

For me this would be a spouse, a relative, an old friend, or even a stranger at a party.

Re: Expanding on what we missed with sycophancy

#122

Post by kergonath »

kadushka wrote: post #121
kergonath wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've never ever thought about needing a therapist. Most people don’t need a therapist. But unfortunately, most people need someone empathic they can talk to and who understands them. Modern life is very short on this sort of people, so therapists have to do.

For me this would be a spouse, a relative, an old friend, or even a stranger at a party.

No argument from me :)

Re: Expanding on what we missed with sycophancy

#124

Post by [deleted] »

rurp wrote: post #114
alickz wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I think most smart people overestimate the intelligence of others for a variety of reasons so they overestimate what it would take for a LLM to beat the output of an average person. I think most people also _vastly_ overestimate how much positive attention the average person gets in their lives It wouldn't surprise me if, for most people, ChatGPT offers them more empathy and understanding than _anyone_ else _ever ha…

>We can argue over whether or not it's "real" empathy There's nothing to argue about, it's unambiguously not real empathy. Empathy from a human exists in a much broader context of past and future interactions. One reason human empathy is nice is because it is often followed up with actions. Friends who care about you will help you out in material ways when you need it. Even strangers will. Someone who sees a person s…

[deleted]

Re: Expanding on what we missed with sycophancy

#125

Post by pixl97 »

kergonath wrote: post #101
taurath wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that most smart people underestimate the complexity of fields they aren’t in. ChatGPT may be able to replace a psychology listicle, but it has no affect or ability to read, respond, and intervene or redirect like a human can.

> I think that most smart people underestimate the complexity of fields they aren’t in. And people deep in new technologies overestimate the potential effect of $new_tech_du_jour. You cannot solve a problem without understanding it and its reasons. And LLMs are not able to understand something.

People have solved problems for most of history without understanding them. For example problems can be brute forced.

Re: Expanding on what we missed with sycophancy

#126

Post by disruptthelaw »

Jonovono wrote: post #84
NoboruWataya wrote: post #17

I found the recent sycophancy a bit annoying when trying to diagnose and solve coding problems. First it would waste time praising your intelligence for asking the question before getting to the answer. But more annoyingly if I asked "I am encountering X issue, could Y be the cause" or "could Y be a solution", the response would nearly always be "yes, exactly, it's Y" even when it wasn't the case. I guess part of the…

It has already replaced therapists, the future is just not evenly distributed yet. There are videos with millions of views on tiktok and comments with hundreds of thousands of likes of teenage girls saying they have gotten more out of 1 week using ChatGPT as a therapist than years of human therapy. Available anytime, cheaper, no judgement, doesn't bring there own baggage, etc.

Yes. While these claims might be hyperbolic and simplistic, I don’t think they’re way off the mark.

The above issue, whilst relevant and worth factoring, doesn’t disprove this claim IMO.

Re: Expanding on what we missed with sycophancy

#127

Post by coastalpuma »

Jonovono wrote: post #84
NoboruWataya wrote: post #17

I found the recent sycophancy a bit annoying when trying to diagnose and solve coding problems. First it would waste time praising your intelligence for asking the question before getting to the answer. But more annoyingly if I asked "I am encountering X issue, could Y be the cause" or "could Y be a solution", the response would nearly always be "yes, exactly, it's Y" even when it wasn't the case. I guess part of the…

It has already replaced therapists, the future is just not evenly distributed yet. There are videos with millions of views on tiktok and comments with hundreds of thousands of likes of teenage girls saying they have gotten more out of 1 week using ChatGPT as a therapist than years of human therapy. Available anytime, cheaper, no judgement, doesn't bring there own baggage, etc.

Just the advantage of being available at convenient times, rather than in the middle of the day sandwiched between or immediately after work/school is huge.

Re: Expanding on what we missed with sycophancy

#128

Post by suddenlybananas »

pixl97 wrote: post #125
kergonath wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think that most smart people underestimate the complexity of fields they aren’t in. And people deep in new technologies overestimate the potential effect of $new_tech_du_jour. You cannot solve a problem without understanding it and its reasons. And LLMs are not able to understand something.

People have solved problems for most of history without understanding them. For example problems can be brute forced.

For example, "wild generalization that has no basis."

Re: Expanding on what we missed with sycophancy

#129

Post by pixl97 »

kergonath wrote: post #103
philwelch wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re comparing ChatGPT to an idealized example of a good human therapist when many actual therapists are either useless or even actively harmful to the mental health of their clients.

But then, the fact that harmful therapist exist is not an excuse to make it worse. It’s an excuse to improve regulations. “Car accidents happen regardless of what we do, so YOLO and remove safety standards” is never going to fly.

That is a messy one here in the US. Almost every time we attempt to increase regulations around medical stuff we end up increasing costs and consolidation making care even more unavailable.

Re: Expanding on what we missed with sycophancy

#130

Post by kergonath »

diggan wrote: post #111
kergonath wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I feel like most people (probably not the typical HN user though) don't even think about their feelings, wants or anything else introspective on a regular basis. Well, two things. First, no. People who engage on HN are a specific part of the population, with particular tendencies. But most of the people here are simply normal, so outside of the limits you consider. Most people with real social issues don’t engage i…

> It is worse than nothing. A LLM does not understand the situation or what people say to it. It cannot choose to, say, nudge someone in a specific direction, or imagine a way to make things better for someone. Right, no matter if this is true or not, if the choice is between "Talk to no one, bottle up your feelings" and "Talk to an LLM that doesn't nudge you in a specific direction", I still feel like the better opt…

> Right, no matter if this is true or not, if the choice is between "Talk to no one, bottle up your feelings" and "Talk to an LLM that doesn't nudge you in a specific direction", I still feel like the better option would be the latter, not the former, considering that it can be a first step, not a 100% health care solution to a complicated psychological problem.

You’re right, I was not clear enough. What would be needed would be a nudge in the right direction. But the LLM is very likely to nudge in another because that’s what most people would need or do, just because that direction was the norm in its training data. It’s ok on average, but particularly harmful to people who are in a situation to have this kind of discussion with a LLM.

Look at the effect of toxic macho influencers for an example of what happens with harmful nudges. These people need help, or at least a role model, but a bad one does not help.

> But to even get out in the world to buy a book (literally or figuratively) about something that acknowledges that you have a problem, can be (at least feel) a really big step that many are not ready to take.

Indeed. It’s something that should be addressed in mainstream education and culture.

> Not sure why you're focusing on social issues,

It’s the crux. If you don’t have problems talking to people, you are much more likely to run into someone who will help you. Social issues are not necessarily the problem, but they are a hurdle in the path to find a solution, and often a limiting one. Besides, if you have friends to talk to and are able to get advice, then a LLM is even less theoretically useful.

> Probably every single human out there struggle with something, and are unable to open up about their problems with others. Even people like us who interact with communities online and offline.

Definitely. It’s not a problem for most people, who either can rationalise their problems themselves with time or with some help. It gets worse if they can’t for one reason or another, and it gets worse still if they are mislead intentionally or not. LLMs are no help here.

Post reply on HN