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

What OpenAI did when ChatGPT users lost touch with reality

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 548 posts

Re: What OpenAI did when ChatGPT users lost touch with reality

#271

Post by [deleted] »

pjc50 wrote: post #270
joshtbradley wrote: post #240

It surprises me how hyper focused people are on AI risk when we’ve grown numb to the millions of preventable deaths that happen every year. 8 million people to smoking. 4 million to obesity. 2.6 million to alcohol. 2.5 million to healthcare. 1.2 million to cars. Hell even coconuts kill 150 people per year. It is tragic that people have lost their mind or their life to AI, and it should be prevented. But those using t…

> 8 million people to smoking Smoking had a huge campaign to (a) encourage people to buy the product, (b) lie about the risks, including bribing politicians and medical professionals, and (c) the product is inherently addictive. That's why people are drawing parallels with AI chatbots. Edit: as with cars, it's fair to argue that the usefulness of the technology outweighs the dangers, but that requires two things: a w…

[deleted]

Re: What OpenAI did when ChatGPT users lost touch with reality

#272

Post by intended »

Guvante wrote: post #162
creata wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The sycophantic and unchallenging behaviours of chatbots leaves a person unconditioned for human interactions. To be honest, the alternative for a good chunk of these users is no interaction at all, and that sort of isolation doesn't prepare you for human interaction either.

Wouldn't they be seeking a romantic relationship otherwise? Using AI to fulfill a need implies a need which usually results in action towards that need. Even "the dating scene is terrible" is human interaction.

In this framing “any” human interaction is good interaction.

This is true if the alternative to “any interaction” is “no interaction”. Bots alter this, and provide “good interaction”.

In this light, the case for relationship bots is quite strong.

Re: What OpenAI did when ChatGPT users lost touch with reality

#273

Post by im3w1l »

p1necone wrote: post #177
ethin wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've found that it still can't really ground me when I've played with it. Like, if I tell it to be honest (or even brutally honest) it goes wayyyyyyyyy too far in the other direction and isn't even remotely objective.

Yeah I tried that once following some advice I saw on another hn thread and the results were hilarious, but not at all useful. It aggressively nitpicked every detail of everything I told it to do, and never made any progress. And it worded all of these nitpicks like a combination of the guy from the ackchyually meme ( https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/ackchyually-actually-guy ) and a badly written Sherlock Holmes.

My advice would be: It can't agree with you if you don't tell it what you think. So don't. Be careful about leading questions (clever hans effect) though.

So better than "I'm thinking of solving x by doing y" is "What do you think about solving x by doing y" but better still is "how can x be solved?" and only mention "y" if it's spinning its wheels.

Re: What OpenAI did when ChatGPT users lost touch with reality

#274

Post by gonzobonzo »

igogq425 wrote: post #260
gonzobonzo wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I didn't use that word, and that's not what I'm concerned about. That was what the "meaningless" comment you took issue with was about. > My point is that an LLM is not inherently opinionated and challenging if you've just put it together accordingly. But this isn't true, anymore than claiming "a video game is not inherently challenging if you've just put it together accordingly." Just because you created something…

I think they have made clear what they are criticizing. And a video game is exactly that: a video game. You can play it or leave it. You don't seem to be making a good faith effort to understand the other points of view being articulated here. So this is a good point to end the exchange.

> And a video game is exactly that: a video game. You can play it or leave it.

No one is claiming you can't walk away from LLM's, or re-prompt them. The discussion was whether they're inherently unchallenging, or if it's possible to prompt one to be challenging and not sycophantic.

"But you can walk away from them" is a nonsequitur. It's like claiming that all games are unchallenging, and then when presented with a challenging game, going "well, it's not challenging because you can walk away from it." This is true, and no one is arguing otherwise. But it's deliberately avoiding the point.

Re: What OpenAI did when ChatGPT users lost touch with reality

#275

Post by jdub »

Quarrelsome wrote: post #186
netsharc wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A friend broke up with her partner. She said she was using ChatGPT as a therapist. She showed me a screenshot, ChatGPT wrote "Oh [name], I can feel how raw the pain is!". WTF, no you don't bot, you're a hunk of metal!

all humans want sometimes, is to be told that what they're feeling is real or not. A sense of validation. It doesn't necessarily matter that much if its an actual person doing it or not.

Yes, it really, truly does. It's especially helpful if that person has some human experience, or even better, up-to-date training in the study of human psychology.

An LLM chat bot has no agency, understanding, empathy, accountability, etc. etc.

Re: What OpenAI did when ChatGPT users lost touch with reality

#276

Post by bakugo »

im3w1l wrote: post #269
bakugo wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Swiping on thousands of people without getting a single date is not human interaction and that's the reality for some people. For some people, yes, but 99% of those people are men. The whole "women with AI boyfriends" thing is an entirely different issue.

Despite the name, the subreddit community has both men and women and both ai boyfriends and ai girlfriends.

I looked through a bunch of posts on the front page (and almost died from cringe in the process) and basically every one of them was a woman with an AI "boyfriend".

Re: What OpenAI did when ChatGPT users lost touch with reality

#277

Post by 2WSSd-JzVM »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #201

Alternative to archive.is busybox wget -U googlebot -O 1.htm https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/23/technology/openai-chatgpt-users-risks.html firefox ./1.htm

It pisses me off. Does anyone know when exactly Google stopped carrying about cloaking? It is the same with Linkedin, you will get a login screen when following a link from Google results. Which was punishable with penalizing position or even removing of site in "good old times".

Re: What OpenAI did when ChatGPT users lost touch with reality

#278

Post by anshulbhide »

joshtbradley wrote: post #240

It surprises me how hyper focused people are on AI risk when we’ve grown numb to the millions of preventable deaths that happen every year. 8 million people to smoking. 4 million to obesity. 2.6 million to alcohol. 2.5 million to healthcare. 1.2 million to cars. Hell even coconuts kill 150 people per year. It is tragic that people have lost their mind or their life to AI, and it should be prevented. But those using t…

Agreed - Really surprising this article didn't cover the flip side - how many lives have been saved due to having an instant source of truth in your pocket.

Re: What OpenAI did when ChatGPT users lost touch with reality

#280

Post by blitzar »

pjc50 wrote: post #270
joshtbradley wrote: post #240

It surprises me how hyper focused people are on AI risk when we’ve grown numb to the millions of preventable deaths that happen every year. 8 million people to smoking. 4 million to obesity. 2.6 million to alcohol. 2.5 million to healthcare. 1.2 million to cars. Hell even coconuts kill 150 people per year. It is tragic that people have lost their mind or their life to AI, and it should be prevented. But those using t…

> 8 million people to smoking Smoking had a huge campaign to (a) encourage people to buy the product, (b) lie about the risks, including bribing politicians and medical professionals, and (c) the product is inherently addictive. That's why people are drawing parallels with AI chatbots. Edit: as with cars, it's fair to argue that the usefulness of the technology outweighs the dangers, but that requires two things: a w…

Asbestos - the material of the future.
Post reply on HN