[dead]
Illinois limits the use of AI in therapy and psychotherapy
111–120 of 262 posts
Re: Illinois limits the use of AI in therapy and psychotherapy
#112I saw a video recently that talked about a chatbot "therapist" that ended up telling the patient to murder a dozen people [1].
It was mind-blowing how easy it was to get LLMs to suggest pretty disturbing stuff.
Re: Illinois limits the use of AI in therapy and psychotherapy
#113[flagged]
[flagged]
Re: Illinois limits the use of AI in therapy and psychotherapy
#114What if it works a third as well as a therapists but is 20 times cheaper? What word should we use for that?
Something like this can only really be worth approaching if there was an analog to losing your license for it. If a therapist screws up badly enough once, I'm assuming they can lose their license for good. If people want to replace them with AI, then screwing up badly enough should similarly lose that AI the ability to practice for good. I can already imagine companies behind these things saying "no, we've learned, w…
AI gets banned for life: tomorrow a thousand more new AIs appear.
Re: Illinois limits the use of AI in therapy and psychotherapy
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's already happening, a lot. I don't think anyone is claiming an llm is a therapist, but people use chatgpt for therapy every day. As far as I know no LLM company is taking any steps to prevent this - but they could, and should be forced to. It must be a goldmine of personal information. I can't imagine some therapists, especially remote only, aren't already just acting as a human interface to chatgtp as well.
> I can't imagine some therapists, especially remote only, aren't already just acting as a human interface to chatgtp as well. Are you joking? Any medical professional caught doing this should lose their license. I would be incensed if I was a patient in this situation, and would litigate. What you're describing is literal malpractice.
The only part that looks like malpractice is sharing patient info in a non HIPAA way. Using an assistive tool for advice is not malpractice. The licensed professional is simply accountable for their curation choices.
Re: Illinois limits the use of AI in therapy and psychotherapy
#116Re: Illinois limits the use of AI in therapy and psychotherapy
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's good about reducing options available for therapy? If the issue is misrepresentation, there are already laws that cover this.
We've tried that, and it turns out that self-regulation doesn't work. If it did, we could live in Libertopia.
[deleted]
Re: Illinois limits the use of AI in therapy and psychotherapy
#118"One news report found an AI-powered therapist chatbot recommended “a small hit of meth to get through this week” to a fictional former addict." Not at all surprising. I don't understand why seemingly bright people think this is a good idea, despite knowing the mechanism behind language models. Hopefully more states follow, because it shouldn't be formally legal in provider settings. Informally, people will continue…
[deleted]
Re: Illinois limits the use of AI in therapy and psychotherapy
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if at some point an AI is developed that’s a better therapist AND it’s cheaper?
I'm probably in the minority here, but for me it's a foregone conclusion that it will become a better therapist, doctor, architect, etc. Instead of the rich getting access to the best professionals, it will level the playing field. The average low level lawyer, doctor, etc are not great. How nice if everyone got top level help.
Why is that a foregone conclusion?