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

OpenAI says over a million people talk to ChatGPT about suicide weekly

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 585 posts

Re: OpenAI says over a million people talk to ChatGPT about suicide weekly

#351

Post by formerly_proven »

mschuster91 wrote: post #335
fragmede wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The unfortunate reality though is that people are going to use whatever resources they have available to them, and ChatGPT is always there, ready to have a conversation, even at 3am on a Tuesday while the client is wasted. You don't need any credentials to see that. And it depends on the therapy and therapist. If the client needs to be reminded to box breathe and that they're using all or nothing thinking again to ge…

> If the client needs to be reminded to box breathe and that they're using all or nothing thinking again to get them off of the ledge, does that really require a human who's only available once a week to gently remind them of that when the therapist isn't going to be available for four more days and ChatGPT's available right now? There are 24/7 suicide prevention hotlines at least in many countries in Europe as well…

> There are 24/7 suicide prevention hotlines at least in many countries in Europe as well as US states.

My understanding is these will generally just send the cops after you if the operator concludes you are actually suicidal and not just looking for someone to talk to for free.

Re: OpenAI says over a million people talk to ChatGPT about suicide weekly

#352

Post by Dilettante_ »

Kevin605 wrote: post #262
bondarchuk wrote: post #252

It becomes a problem when people cannot distinguish real from fake. As long as people realize they are talking to a piece of software and not a real person, "suicidal people shouldn't be allowed to use LLMs" is almost on par with "suicidal people shouldn't be allowed to read books", or "operate a dvd player", or "listen to alt-rock from the 90s". The real problem is of course grossly deficient mental health care and…

I don’t buy the “LLMs = books” analogy. Books are static; today’s LLMs are adaptive persuasion engines trained to keep you engaged and to mirror your feelings. That’s functionally closer to a specialized book written for you, in your voice, to move you toward a particular outcome. If there exists a book intended to persuade its readers into committing suicide, it would surely be seen as dangerous for depressed people…

There has certainly been more than one book, song, film, romanticising suicide to the point where some people interpreted it to be "intended to persuade its readers into committing suicide".

Re: OpenAI says over a million people talk to ChatGPT about suicide weekly

#353

Post by spookie »

ethbr1 wrote: post #333
alex-moon wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect you've never done therapy yourself. Most people who have worked with a professional therapist understand intuitively why the only helpful feedback from an LLM to someone who needs professional help is: get professional help. AIs are really good at doing something to about 80%. When the stakes are life or death, as they are with someone who is suicidal, that is a good example of a time when 80% isn't good en…

You're holding up a perfect status quo that doesn't correspond to reality. Countries vary, but in the US and many places there's a shortage of quality therapists. Thus for many people the actual options are {no therapy} and {LLM therapy}. > This is why we have safety regulations, why we don't let people drive cars that haven't passed tests, build with materials that haven't passed tests, eat food that hasn't passed t…

Ok then, the LLMs must pass the same tests and be as regulated as therapists.

After all, it should be easy peasy (:

Re: OpenAI says over a million people talk to ChatGPT about suicide weekly

#354

Post by jack_tripper »

ethbr1 wrote: post #333
alex-moon wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect you've never done therapy yourself. Most people who have worked with a professional therapist understand intuitively why the only helpful feedback from an LLM to someone who needs professional help is: get professional help. AIs are really good at doing something to about 80%. When the stakes are life or death, as they are with someone who is suicidal, that is a good example of a time when 80% isn't good en…

You're holding up a perfect status quo that doesn't correspond to reality. Countries vary, but in the US and many places there's a shortage of quality therapists. Thus for many people the actual options are {no therapy} and {LLM therapy}. > This is why we have safety regulations, why we don't let people drive cars that haven't passed tests, build with materials that haven't passed tests, eat food that hasn't passed t…

>Countries vary, but in the US and many places there's a shortage of quality therapists.

Worse in my EU country. There's even a shortage of shitty therapists and doctors, let alone quality ones. It takes 6+ months to get an appointment for a 5 minute checkup at a poorly reviewed state funded therapist, while the good ones are either private or don't accept any new patients if they're on the public system. And ADHD diagnosticians/therapists are only in the private sector because I guess the government doesn't recognize ADHD as being a "real" mental issue worthy of your tax Euros.

A friend of mine got a more accurate diagnosis for his breathing issue by putting his symptoms in ChatGPT than he got from his general practitioner, later confirmed by a good specialist. I also wasted a lot of money on bad private therapists that were basically just phoning in their job, so to me, the bar seems pretty low, since as long as they pass their med-school exams and don't kill too many people through malpractice, nobody checks up on how good or bad their are at their job (maybe some need more training, or maybe some don't belong in medicine at all but managed to slipped through the cracks).

Not saying all doctors are bad (I've met few amazing ones), but it definitely seems like the healthcare systems are failing a lot of people everywhere if they resort to LLMs for diagnosis and therapy and getting better results from it.

Re: OpenAI says over a million people talk to ChatGPT about suicide weekly

#355

Post by exasperaited »

imiric wrote: post #291
exasperaited wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A human can also say the wrong things to push someone in a certain direction. A psychologist, or anyone else for that matter, can't stop someone from committing suicide if they've already made up their mind about it. They're educated on human psychology, but they're not miracle workers. The best they can do is raise a flag if they suspect self-harm, but then again, so could a machine. ChatGPT essentially encouraged…

But that's not the issue. The issue is that a kid is talking to a machine without supervision in the first place, and presumably taking advice from it. The main questions are: where are the guardians of this child? What is the family situation and living environment? A child thinking about suicide is clearly a sign that there are far greater problems in their life than taking advice from a machine. Let's address thos…

> But that's not the issue.

It is the issue at least in the sense that it's the one I was personally responding to, thanks. And there are many issues, not just the one you are choosing to focus on.

"Deeper societal problems" is a typical get-out clause for all harmful technology.

It's not good enough. Like, in the USA they say "deeper societal problems" about guns; other countries ban them and have radically fewer gun deaths while they are also addressing those problems.

It's not an either-we-ban-guns-or-we-help-mentally-ill-people. Por qué no los dos? Deeper societal problems are not represented by a neat dividing line between cause and symptom; they are cyclical.

The current push towards LLMs and other technologies is one of the deepest societal problems humans have ever had to consider.

ChatGPT engaged in an entire line of discussion that no human counsellor would engage in, leading to an outcome that no human intervention (except that of a psychopath) would cause. Because it was sycophantic.

Just saying "but humans also" is wholly irrational in this context.

Re: OpenAI says over a million people talk to ChatGPT about suicide weekly

#356

Post by sharts »

probably_wrong wrote: post #229

If you haven't read the article (or even if you have but didn't click on outgoing links twice ) the NYT story about how ChatGPT convinced a suicidal teen not to look for help [1] should convince you that ChatGPT should be nowhere near anyone dealing with psychological issues. Here's ChatGPT discouraging said teenager from asking for help: > “I want to leave my noose in my room so someone finds it and tries to stop me…

Something is indeed NOT better than nothing. However, for those with mental and emotional issues (likely stemming from social / societal failures in the first place) anything would be better nothing because they need interaction and patience —two things these AI tools have in abundance.

Sadly there is no alternative. This is happening and there’s no going back. Many will be affected in detrimental ways (if not worse). We all go on with our lives because that which does not directly affect us is not our problem —is someone else’s problem/responsibility.

Re: OpenAI says over a million people talk to ChatGPT about suicide weekly

#357

Post by jeswin »

ml-anon wrote: post #173
jeswin wrote: post #157

Contrarian opinion. OpenAI gets a lot of hate these days, but on this subject it's quite possible that ChatGPT helped a lot of people choose a less drastic path. There could have been unfortunate incidents, but the number of people who were convinced to not take extreme steps would have been of a few orders of magnitude more (guessing). I use it to help improve mental health, and with good prompting skills it's not b…

Amazing based on 0 evidence whatsoever “it’s passable that…” Also incredible how you framed improving your mental health as a consequence of a (pseudo) technical skill set. Yeah this isn’t how any of this works and you’re deluding yourself.

> Yeah this isn’t how any of this works and you’re deluding yourself.

I am not offended (at all). But you're dismissing my (continued) positive experience with "You're deluding yourself". How do you know? It'd be a lot more unfair to people who benefit more than I do, and I can totally imagine that being not a small set of people.

> Also incredible how you framed improving your mental health as a consequence of a (pseudo) technical skill set.

It's not incredible at all. If you're lost in a jungle with predators, a marksman might reach for their gun. A runner might just rely on running. I am just using skills I'm good at.

Re: OpenAI says over a million people talk to ChatGPT about suicide weekly

#358

Post by paulcole »

spookie wrote: post #353
ethbr1 wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're holding up a perfect status quo that doesn't correspond to reality. Countries vary, but in the US and many places there's a shortage of quality therapists. Thus for many people the actual options are {no therapy} and {LLM therapy}. > This is why we have safety regulations, why we don't let people drive cars that haven't passed tests, build with materials that haven't passed tests, eat food that hasn't passed t…

Ok then, the LLMs must pass the same tests and be as regulated as therapists. After all, it should be easy peasy (:

If the choice is between no food and food then your standard for food goes way down.

Re: OpenAI says over a million people talk to ChatGPT about suicide weekly

#359

Post by Dilettante_ »

ml-anon wrote: post #171
btilly wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The general rule of thumb is this. When given the right prompts, LLMs can be very effective at therapy. Certainly my wife gets a lot of mileage out of having ChatGPT help her reframe things in a better way. However "the right prompts" are not the ones that most mentally ill people would choose for themselves. And it is very easy for ChatGPT to become part of a person's delusion spiral, rather then be a helpful part o…

Holy shit this is so fucking wrong and dangerous. No, LLMs are not and cannot be “very effective at therapy”.

Can you give just a little bit more effort explaining why you say that?

Re: OpenAI says over a million people talk to ChatGPT about suicide weekly

#360

Post by exasperaited »

whycome wrote: post #297
imiric wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with your concerns, but I think you're overestimating the value of a human intervening in these scenarios. A human can also say the wrong things to push someone in a certain direction. A psychologist, or anyone else for that matter, can't stop someone from committing suicide if they've already made up their mind about it. They're educated on human psychology, but they're not miracle workers. The best they can…

I should add that the persons responding to calls on suicide help lines are often just volunteers rather than psychologists.

And they know not to give advice like ChatGPT gave. They wouldn't even be entertaining that kind of discussion.
Post reply on HN