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

We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 1001 posts

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#571

Post by mgraczyk »

dv_dt wrote: post #555
mgraczyk wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry I do not understand what that means. You're talking about opportunity cost? In what sense is "time spent" economic?

If the cost per hour to say, go to the movies has tripled, but attendance has gone down by half, then by cost, more movie entertainment is being consumed than ever before, but the number of people and number of hours participating in the activity has actually gone down

The best data I could find shows a decline of around 25% from 2006 to 2023 in restaurant visits. However, a big portion of this is because of meal delivery which is more expensive than restaurants, so the cause is probably not mostly increased cost.

Other related things like concert attendance have gone up.

My take is that the main reason young people don't go out is not price, they often seem to be making choices that cost more when they avoid going out

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#572

Post by wilg »

HaZeust wrote: post #567
mgraczyk wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any source will do, here is the Atlanta fed https://www.atlantafed.org/chcs/wage-growth-tracker Click "age" Then compare to price levels. Wages have outpaced price levels for this age group significantly Here's men 16-24 showing 20% increase after CPI adjustment https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LEU0252882200Q EDIT: the data you shared is not specific to "young people", that's why it's different. While everyone's wa…

Rent, household items, cost of external activities, and health insurance (sometimes, see parents' insurance plans) are still subject to that group - which my sources show clear outpacing for - even with youth's increase in wages. For someone that lives with their parents and works full time, yeah - they've probably never had it better. But a lot of youth right now have expenses drawn out in such a way where, even if…

CPI inflation adjustment accounts for this, that's the purpose of it. You're trying to bend the data to your pre-existing beliefs.

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#573

Post by mgraczyk »

HaZeust wrote: post #567
mgraczyk wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any source will do, here is the Atlanta fed https://www.atlantafed.org/chcs/wage-growth-tracker Click "age" Then compare to price levels. Wages have outpaced price levels for this age group significantly Here's men 16-24 showing 20% increase after CPI adjustment https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LEU0252882200Q EDIT: the data you shared is not specific to "young people", that's why it's different. While everyone's wa…

Rent, household items, cost of external activities, and health insurance (sometimes, see parents' insurance plans) are still subject to that group - which my sources show clear outpacing for - even with youth's increase in wages. For someone that lives with their parents and works full time, yeah - they've probably never had it better. But a lot of youth right now have expenses drawn out in such a way where, even if…

But what you are claiming is contradicted by the data you shared. When you weight the categories you listed by how much that age group spends, they still have more money (young people spend much much less on healthcare, you'd be shocked at how little they actually spend. You have to look at out of pocket costs, not provider charges which mostly not paid in full)

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#574

Post by HaZeust »

Nathanba wrote: post #335
egypturnash wrote: post #295

It's not going to solve loneliness. It's just going to provide a weak substitute for actual socialization. Talking with actual humans but only over the internet is not enough, I have been there and it was a terrible trap, it provided just enough to make it possible for me to avoid physical socialization, while not giving me enough to actually thrive; we need to get out and be in the same place with other people, doin…

Real humans are also fake and they are also traps who are waiting to catch you when you say something they don't like. Then they also use every word and piece of information as ammunition against you, ironically sort of similar to the criticism always levied against online platforms who track you and what you say. AI robots are going to easily replace real humans because compared to most real humans the AI is already…

This outlook on life is a perilous endeavor. Eliminate lesser friends, curate your circle to find better ones, talk to a professional about your ill-advised beliefs on humanity at large. It's not an easy process, but it's a necessary one.

Write it down, make a plan.

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#575

Post by phito »

achierius wrote: post #422
dclowd9901 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On your last point, I've noticed an uptick in folks treating their dogs in ways most people might treat their children. So while I think on paper what you say makes sense, at some point, I think people are in fact personifying their pets to a degree that they recognize them as adjacent to human beings.

But in the end, the chickens always come home to roost. Dogs cannot support you in your old age; they cannot give you the pride of seeing a child go off to college; they cannot captivate you with conversations as they grow into full adults; and of course, they die far, far earlier than you. Similarly, the AI companions we create will be simulacra of the real thing. It's hard to say what exactly the differences will b…

Children are not born to be your personal care takers for when you eventually get old.

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#577

Post by calaphos »

stdvit wrote: post #97

> Even in a world brimming with easy distractions—TikTok, Pornhub, Candy Crush, Sudoku—people still manage to meet for drinks, work out at the gym, go on dates, muddle through real life. They actually don't. Everything from dating and fitness to manufacturing and politics is in decline in activities, and more so in effect and understanding. You can't convince (enough) people anymore that it is even important as many…

But these social third places have also shifted. Younger generations aren't going out as much but e.g. playing video games specifically with other close friends is very popular.

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#578

Post by HaZeust »

0points wrote: post #45
somenameforme wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mine as well. Trolling pedos on AOL who thought they were meeting up with teen girls was our past time. We got quite good at looking up locations, organizing places to meet, and more. We were Chris Hansen, in bored teen boys form. Ah the days of A/S/L.

I was a teen meeting real girls from IRC. Guess you missed out on the S part.

"Me? Having sex from the IRC days?! Oh, don't you worry, I had sex."

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#579

Post by nathan_compton »

RamblingCTO wrote: post #98
nathan_compton wrote: post #18

The idea that AI is going to "solve" loneliness is so insane. Even the framing of the idea is insane, in my opinion. Loneliness is not really about having someone to exchange words with, fundamentally. It is about being validated by other human beings or entities. At a most fundamental level the AI doesn't have a choice except to appear to validate you and this lack of freedom, the fact that you do not win over the A…

100%. There's always the layer of hormones, chemicals, touch, electric fields, and whatnot that also entails human contact. Mirror neurons. Stuff like that. It's like replacing a partner with a sex doll. I'm a bit sad that the author didn't have a take on the cheap reproduction of human contact and how it's connected to our broader culture and instead thinks about a non-solution to one of the issues that causes a lot…

But I'm not even talking about that. While I think embodied AI would probably improve the illusion and might help some people, the fundamental issue is that loneliness can only be alleviated by an entity that can judge you as unworthy of their attention and time. If you build a robot specifically to give someone positive regard it actually isn't giving positive regard because it has no choice.

While there are basic elements of human interaction which robots could provide, the need to have the actual approval of members of your actual community of their own free will and volition cannot be "outsourced" to an entity without agency.

Re: We may not like what we become if A.I. solves loneliness

#580

Post by nathan_compton »

yomismoaqui wrote: post #116
jwally wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Super interesting point that struck a chord with me. Without the risk of rejection, the ai will come off as a sycophantic ass kissing yes-man. It might be seductive at first but will get old fast for most people, I would imagine. What would be really interesting is how much longer the relationship would last if it were formed on a social media site or forum where there is still some risk of rejection, and validation…

Who says an LLM has to be a sycophantic yes-man? Today there are LLM roleplay models than can behave like some character with a specific personality (e.g. a tsundere). So if you want a electronic partner that sometimes puts you in your place you can have it. And this is with the current roleplay models, sincerely I'm a little scared with what would be available in 5 years.

Yes, but if you know the model is instructed to behave a certain way you are still not actually earning its regard. It is just trying to make you feel less lonely via some convoluted pathway.
Post reply on HN