Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

404media.co

51–60 of 130 posts

Re: Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

#51
post #36
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess I worded that poorly; it isn't merely that we don't need an objective measure: we literally don't need a measure at all, as the crime would be attempting to cause it, whether or not it was even possible to do, and so we simply do not care if the activity was addictive. If you are going out of your way to exploit the psychology or physiology of other humans in an attempt to use that to sell your product, maybe…

This just shifts the question to: what counts as attempt to cause an addiction? Does writing a book aims to make people read addictive? Try to design a gym class that makes you feel good about yourself so you will come again? You still need to define what is addictive

Ok, fair, so, to try to apply this to my analogous crime: I would agree that attempted murder does need a definition of "murder"; but, the crime does not care whether your specific plan would have led to an act of murder, only whether or not the defendant was trying to murder.

We thereby do not necessarily need a way to know whether reading--either your book or any book--is addictive or not, but only the extent to which you were going out of your way to make it addictive, for which I think it might then be OK to have some specific-yet-contrived definition that is difficult to apply to any specific product but feels like a wrong thing to do (maybe my "exploit human psychology or physiology")?

Re: Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

#52
post #19

Maybe trying to engineer addiction is what should be illegal, and if you want to question "how do you define whether something is addictive" you don't need an objective measure: you determine whether it seems like the people making the product seem to think that's their goal.

This applies to any business that wants a repeat customer.

You are right! We should regulate all businesses the same way.

Re: Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

#53
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine a world where every car company would get money every time someone uses their car. Instead of monthly subscription for self driving or heated seat, it would just cost a few cents a minute. This would be a strong push to try to destroy public transportation everywhere

>Imagine a world where every car company would get money every time someone uses their car. So oil companies? Moreover car companies do get more money with more car use. More driving means more parts required, more servicing needed (from their dealership network), and cars that need to be replaced sooner. It's not as instantaneous as uber charging your card every time you do a ride, but I don't see how that makes a m…

They don't get everything, spare parts are made by other companies, same with tires, servicing can be done outside their network...

Microsoft handles more verticality.

Re: Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

#55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because your employer doesn't think they can ever be addictive.

No, it was because they weren't supposed to be. They were fulfilling an actual need and creating value in a way that wasn't intended to be addictive. And I was a co-founder of some of those orgs and products, so it wasn't about my employer. I know it's hard to believe that not every organization is sociopathic, because many are (the larger, the more likely to be). But not every one is.

I think the most disturbing aspect of HN is how so many people seem to believe that anti-social behavior is rational. There is this weird dichotomy that you are either a money hungry behemoth or destitute out on the street. My company is a not-for-profit, we put our revenue back into the local community, our employees make a great living and we still have year over year growth.

Re: Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

#56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it was because they weren't supposed to be. They were fulfilling an actual need and creating value in a way that wasn't intended to be addictive. And I was a co-founder of some of those orgs and products, so it wasn't about my employer. I know it's hard to believe that not every organization is sociopathic, because many are (the larger, the more likely to be). But not every one is.

I think the most disturbing aspect of HN is how so many people seem to believe that anti-social behavior is rational. There is this weird dichotomy that you are either a money hungry behemoth or destitute out on the street. My company is a not-for-profit, we put our revenue back into the local community, our employees make a great living and we still have year over year growth.

Evidence that anti-social behavior is rational can be seen in all the successful anti-social people, like Elon, Donald, Jeffrey and William.

Re: Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

#57
post #19

Maybe trying to engineer addiction is what should be illegal, and if you want to question "how do you define whether something is addictive" you don't need an objective measure: you determine whether it seems like the people making the product seem to think that's their goal.

This applies to any business that wants a repeat customer.

You’re implying there’s no distinction between addiction and use. And I think you’re excessive cynicism is just wrong in practical ways,

I always buy my nails from Home Depot. I’m not addicted to nails. Home Depot does not reasonably think they can get me addicted to nails.

Re: Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

#58
post #34

Good on Nadella: After expressing his complete disbelief that such a document could have been written, Nadella adds that the elusive and mysterious authors “may want to go work elsewhere.” edit: VP of a product I had not even heard of; it's no Copilot. I would not assume it was on Nadella's radar.

The author is his vice president of Microsoft Scout, "with AI assistance, but fully reviewed" as has been reported elsewhere.

He's blatantly pretending not to know

Re: Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to Its New AI Assistant

#60
post #19

Maybe trying to engineer addiction is what should be illegal, and if you want to question "how do you define whether something is addictive" you don't need an objective measure: you determine whether it seems like the people making the product seem to think that's their goal.

I would argue that intent should not even matter. Whatever punishment/consequences are deemed appropriate, they should apply based on the system's actual exploitation of addictive tendencies in humans. Otherwise you're just incentivizing people to get better at covering their tracks.
Post reply on HN