31–39 of 39 posts
It looks like fairly standard incomprehensible psychosis messages but it seems notable to me that ChatGPT responds as if they are normal (profound, even) messages.
The 'In Search of AI Psychosis' article and discussions on HN [2] from a few days ago are very relevant here too.
[0] https://www.instagram.com/eriktheviking1987
why is this stuff legal? there should be a "black box" warning prominent on every chatbox message from AI, like "This is AI guidance which can potentially result in grave bodily harm to yourself and others."
Just to be safe, we better start attaching these warnings to every social media client. Can't be too careful
why is this stuff legal? there should be a "black box" warning prominent on every chatbox message from AI, like "This is AI guidance which can potentially result in grave bodily harm to yourself and others."
Your solution for protecting mentally ill people is to expect them to be rational and correctly interpret/follow advice? Just to be safe, we better start attaching these warnings to every social media client. Can't be too careful
This but completely unironically.
Having dealt with near and distant family psychosis on more than one occasion… The truth is that the most random stuff will set them off. In one case, a patient would find reinforcement on obscure YouTube groups of people predicting the doom of the future. Maybe the advantage of AI over YouTube psychosis groups is that AI could at least be trained to alert the authorities after enough murder/suicide data is gathered.
I don't think AI informing authorities (who would do nothing) is in any way desirable. At some point you have to just live with marginal dangers. There is no technical solution here.
(We have family that would be homeless if we hadn’t taken them under our wings to house them).
This is not Cyberpunk 2077 and "AI psychosis" is trash, just like the article. Someone is mentally ill, and can use AI. Doesn't mean AI is the problem. A mentally ill person can also use a car. Let's ban cars?
A car won't manipulate you into ending your's or someone else's life. You just get on the car and do it. An AI can lead you from a fragile state of mind to a suicidal state of mind. Not saying I want AIs to be banned or that the article is good, I'm just argumenting that your analogy could potentially be flawed.
This is not Cyberpunk 2077 and "AI psychosis" is trash, just like the article. Someone is mentally ill, and can use AI. Doesn't mean AI is the problem. A mentally ill person can also use a car. Let's ban cars?
A car won't manipulate you into ending your's or someone else's life. You just get on the car and do it. An AI can lead you from a fragile state of mind to a suicidal state of mind. Not saying I want AIs to be banned or that the article is good, I'm just argumenting that your analogy could potentially be flawed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think AI informing authorities (who would do nothing) is in any way desirable. At some point you have to just live with marginal dangers. There is no technical solution here.
Wouldn’t have to be ‘authorities’, but for people with broken families, authorities who knock on the door and check for a health crisis are literally all that they have. (We have family that would be homeless if we hadn’t taken them under our wings to house them).
why is this stuff legal? there should be a "black box" warning prominent on every chatbox message from AI, like "This is AI guidance which can potentially result in grave bodily harm to yourself and others."
Your solution for protecting mentally ill people is to expect them to be rational and correctly interpret/follow advice? Just to be safe, we better start attaching these warnings to every social media client. Can't be too careful
I used AI to find the location of an item in a large supermarket today. It guessed and was wrong, but the first human I saw inside knew the exact location and quantity remaining.
Why am I wasting my time? That should be a nagging question whenever we're online.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A car won't manipulate you into ending your's or someone else's life. You just get on the car and do it. An AI can lead you from a fragile state of mind to a suicidal state of mind. Not saying I want AIs to be banned or that the article is good, I'm just argumenting that your analogy could potentially be flawed.
Even a song can do that, or a movie