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

We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 1001 posts

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#221

Post by AlecSchueler »

dpassens wrote: post #186
AlecSchueler wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one implied they would, but the thread you're commenting on literally begins with an abstract discussion about using the law to coerce you into having a more "positive" birth rate.

But it doesn't, does it? For one, the question was merely whether we'd observe an increased birth rate, not whether that is a reason to pass such a law. Secondly, you're the one who's bringing up coercion. You can both not be on social media and not have kids. It's still your decision.

The comment I responded to was specifically talking about "banning social media" and their confidence this would have a "positive" impact on birth rates, despite the clear preferences of younger people. I'm "bringing up" coercion because I'm not sure how to describe such policies and intentions otherwise?

The reason for it might not have been made explicit but we both understand what they were driving at and why they weren't "merely" asking the question of what effect a social media ban might have on chocolate sales or something equally arbitrary.

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#222

Post by giantrobot »

mantas wrote: post #193
mystraline wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my smaller city, parks and benches are populated with homeless people of various types. At minimum, the benches are used. Worse off, a significant minority are actively violent with a good dose of various untreated mental illnesses. Crossing them is not good for your health. And it also makes kind of a terrible environment to talk with friends, while avoiding drug needles. Even the public library has similar probl…

Looks like you guys have bigger issues than socializing and expensive coffee. Here it’s not uncommon to meet some rowdy people out and about. Not necessarily homeless. But it’s not hard to find some silent corner to enjoy some coffee from a thermos. Other option… Maybe head out to nature trails? Chat while walking at enjoy some coffee at a rest stop? Even few kilometers from the city homeless are unlikely even wheree…

> Even few kilometers from the city homeless are unlikely even whereever you are…?

Where I am all the nature and bike trails lined with homeless encampments. It's actually been quite a problem. Unless you go out on serious hike type trails you're surrounded by homeless.

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#223

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

soulofmischief wrote: post #203
IgorPartola wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d like to offer an alternative explanation than AI to this. Shit is just too damn expensive. If you want to go hang out with friends it will cost you $4-8 for a cup of coffee. A dinner starts at $50/person. A trip to an amusement park is over $100 easily. The median individual income in the US currently is just over $65k/year or about $32.50/hour. That means half the workforce makes less than that. When an 8oz cock…

In my state is the federal minimum of $7.25/hr. You're looking at two hours of work for one cocktail. And my state is addicted to alcohol. The overwhelming majority of people I know in this state won't even meet up with you if there's not a beer waiting for them. People work all week and then spend half their paycheck in one night, then rinse, wash, repeat. I consider the state of affairs here to be nothing short of…

This idea of pretending that your only option is $15 cocktails really makes this argument look lame. Not to mention that the federal minimum wage is basically irrelevant in most places - where I live starting entry level pay at McDonald's is $17/hr.

Cocktails were expensive when I was young, too. We just hardly ever drank them. We went to the liquor store and bought the cheapest shit we could that probably had a 50/50 chance of making us go blind.

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#224

Post by mortenjorck »

kylecazar wrote: post #159

AI is incapable of solving loneliness. It's a biological signal we have (thanks to evolution) to seek social connections with other humans , for things like reproduction and survival. Mentally healthy people will never be less lonely as long as they know they are talking to a model. All it can offer is a distraction and an illusion, because it has no humanity. Note: I don't even think dogs solve loneliness. They can…

I don’t think your point and the reply about dogs are in disagreement. If anything, the “anthropification” of dogs (putting them in strollers, having birthday parties for them) strongly suggests that AI is headed for that role, and if happiness surveys are anything to go by, neither the dogs nor the chat bots are going to have the desired effect, even as they trend toward ubiquity.

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#225

Post by f311a »

kylecazar wrote: post #159

AI is incapable of solving loneliness. It's a biological signal we have (thanks to evolution) to seek social connections with other humans , for things like reproduction and survival. Mentally healthy people will never be less lonely as long as they know they are talking to a model. All it can offer is a distraction and an illusion, because it has no humanity. Note: I don't even think dogs solve loneliness. They can…

Yeah, there is also a hormonal aspect that I don't think AI can trigger.

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#226

Post by rambambram »

DaylitMagic wrote: post #180

I've been working on making an AI to help decrease my own loneliness for eight months. It is, indeed, not a replacement for best friends. But it does replace all the weak tie friendships I previously had. I was tired of feeling like the only one who cared about my online friendships - the AI, imperfect as it is - cares. Is easily the thing I interact with the most. As an introvert who struggles to make new friendship…

I don't know, but you come across as a genuine nice person who I could talk to about all kinds of topics, just somewhere on a bench in the park.

Even sharing and commenting on HN has some social aspect to it. Of course, I might be conversing with bots for years already and I have no way of checking that. ;)

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#227

Post by kenjackson »

miraks wrote: post #114
ninetyninenine wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t understand how you u can’t worry about this. Like there’s a trend line of progress right? Ok so the thing isn’t effective now. But there’s a decade of upward progress and that projection line point to a future where a better AI exists. Trend-lines don’t point to an exact future just a most probable future. It is unwise to discount the most probable future.

If you gave me a model released two years ago and today and let me do some programming with both, I would have no problems telling you which one was released two years ago; progress on this front is very noticeable. But if you let me chat with each one for an hour, I'm honestly not sure I would be able to tell the difference.

You could definitely tell the difference. The persistence and context windows make a world of difference in just casual usage.

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#228

Post by Havoc »

al_borland wrote: post #72
Havoc wrote: post #31

Even though I'm arguable among the target audience here so to speak I can't really wrap my head around this. It's too steerable and just echos back whatever direction you take it. No own emotional state, interests, agency, variability etc. Even as a substitute for social interaction it feels so inadequate to be pointless. Plenty of people do roleplaying and AI girlfriends etc so I guess it depends on the person?

Most people don't realize this is happening. My dad sent me a few chats he had with ChatGPT and they were both stroking each other's egos pretty hard. It was pretty weird. He was using it a lot to get information and prep before a surgery and I felt like ChatGPT reinforced his unrealistic expectations for the speed of recovery. I didn't say anything before the surgery, as I didn't want to break his spirit and a posit…

I guess some level of "I'm too smart to fall for it but the others" is something we all are susceptible to.

>AI as a therapist,

I could see this working. Since it's just reflecting conversation back. A bit like rubber duck debugging you don't necessarily need it to respond back

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#229

Post by intended »

johnfn wrote: post #194
IgorPartola wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d like to offer an alternative explanation than AI to this. Shit is just too damn expensive. If you want to go hang out with friends it will cost you $4-8 for a cup of coffee. A dinner starts at $50/person. A trip to an amusement park is over $100 easily. The median individual income in the US currently is just over $65k/year or about $32.50/hour. That means half the workforce makes less than that. When an 8oz cock…

I don't buy this explanation. There are plenty of things you can do together that don't cost very much - or anything at all. You can go take a hike. You can go to the park and hang out, or play a board game. You can go to a court and play pickleball. Heck, go to the library! All these things are free and many people do them.

Shit is expensive is in context of the option to watch tikitok.

Not that shit is expensive as a be all explanation in and of itself.

It’s a point on the relative ease/benefit of content vs meeting people. And you can even meet people over zoom or a video game now.

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#230

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

taormina wrote: post #208
johnfn wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't buy this explanation. There are plenty of things you can do together that don't cost very much - or anything at all. You can go take a hike. You can go to the park and hang out, or play a board game. You can go to a court and play pickleball. Heck, go to the library! All these things are free and many people do them.

Gas costs money. The car costs money. You can only do the same hike that's an hour away so many times, before you're traveling to go to new places, and hotels cost money at that point. Pickleball courts cost money. The pickleball equipment costs money. People do go to the library, and then they go home and don't interact with other people.

The fact that many young people don't seem to think that "Hey, we'd just go over to someone's apartment/house to hang out and have a meal or drink" as a primary form of entertainment (vs. some "activity") makes me realize how much we have fucked over many young people as a society in general.
Post reply on HN