F
Social media has primed the public to be manipulated by human impersonating AI.
As a teen growing up with early internet I struggled to get adults to understand that *anything* going on "online" could possibly be important or real.
But over a decade of social media has taught many people that a text chat can be significant: emotionally important.
I think a pre-socail media public would be more inclined to just roll their eyes at LLMs.
Maybe "LLM enabled social cloistering"
"LLM enabled emotional solitary confinement."
"Single Person Cult"
Like creating a cult for just you and abusing yourself as the only member of that cult.
I think that is one of the many ways it can work. But it also might go in many different directions based on the person.
When people are put in solitary confinement it can be torture and induce to mental illness and suffering.
I think it is this isolation that causes the problem. The person has put themself "in the hole" but they don't know they are isolated.
Isolation removes the check and balances that help keep us sane. The little nudges back to a healthy mental place.
"AI Psychosis" is not an ideal term. Conjures a "crazy ranting person" which, granted, is what this problem *might* look like.
But people may think "that can't be me. I'm not crazy" (in that stereotypical sense, with all of the attendant negative and harmful ideas that are common about mental illness.)
The problem is receiving "care" we *need* from other *people* from something that cannot provide this care.
Emotional malnutrition?
A false sense of not being alone when you are VERY alone?
Amazing. What is it about this photo that even at a small size it seems so high resolution? It's like looking into a window on a real vast landscape.
Perhaps it's that everything in the image is in focus despite the depth of the landscape ... made more dramatic by that ridge with the contrasting shadow coming towards us?
Can one do focus staking with landscapes just as with macro images?
Yup. I don't like to admit how well that worked on me.
Show me someone causally but confidently wrong with pretensions being an intellectual and I'm so excited to get in the ring and start proving them wrong.
Facebook could find such posts extremely efficiently. These were posts from real people I didn't know (who weren't even talking to me.) They would be served up on my dashboard because I'd type a response.
Now it might not even be a person.
This can be very dangerous for people who think "I don't really ever need to talk to anyone about my feelings."
This isn't true, it's just their needs are minimal.
"Feeling down."
"ya"
That's two letters but getting such a response can make you feel so much better. It represents someone, should things get worse, who might come over and help you.
A chatbot can say "ya" too. But, it doesn't make you feel better... **unless** you think it's a person. That's the danger.
I'm trying to cultivate that perspective. But I do really love to be right. Probably too much.
"I don't need to eat anything. I just looked at this photo of a meal and now I feel full. It was delicious. I didn't even need to cook or go out to get it. So expedient."
And then slowly they starve.
Yeah, but asking it to change breaks the veil that makes "AI psychosis" dangerous to some degree.
The issue is that people get the feeling there is a thinking being in the machine and allow it to satisfy critical emotional needs for human connection that we all have. The program takes up space and time that could go to real people in their lives.
It's emotional empty calories. Food without real sustenance and if that dominates your diet you will get sick.
I have the worst migraine. Seeing sparkles and little blips of light. But I already drank coffee thinking I'd go to work. Then I realized I can't go. I'm too sick. And now I'm mad I drank the coffee.
Trying to enjoy the light show.
"Sycophancy creeps me out."
It's very creepy. The only people who have talked to me with that much positivity and agreeableness *ever* in my life were the worst sort of men who wanted to sleep with me in my 20s. I have a deep visceral negative reaction to that kind of consistent flattery.
It makes my skin crawl.
But why is it so fulfilling to have a good back and forth with someone? To disagree and pull the whole problem apart and ideally come out on top? (though it's also fun to discover you needed to learn something too, it's just less fun and rewarding)
It's fulfilling because they care about what you are saying enough to criticize it. The difference between the art teacher who says "that's a very nice drawing" and "I can see that you are trying to do X but it's failing/working in these ways."
Frankly, I'm kind of glad these GPTs were so sycophantic. A more critical voice might have been more appealing to me. A contrarian bot who always nitpicks and argues with you.
That's how facebook's old 2016 algorithm wasted so much of my time. I sucked in by the opportunity to dismantle someone who is wrong. Not the most ... healthy personal quality. I'm working on it always.
Another "tip" is less welcome to me as an introvert. Make time for the people in your life. Talk to them. Let them know when you *really* think they are doing something amazing or creative. (Or when it's not "genius" because you are real and care.) Listen. Be there.
The thing is, as much as doing this is scary and I want to avoid it it makes me feel better too in the long run I think.
I've been reading about what really helped people who had problems with "AI Psychosis" and one tip jumped out at me:
Open a second window and tell it exactly the opposite of each thing you say.
This helps to expose the sycophancy and shatters the illusion of sincerity and humanity.
Thought it was worth sharing. And frankly, it's exactly such an exercise that made me disgusted with the tech. "It just says ANYTHING is wonderful and genius. I'm not special."
If a person or group of people do not see you as an equal being worthy of equal respect they will make objections and criticism of your actions and see no problem or contradiction when they do not apply the same standards to themselves.
Imagine trying to care about the feelings of your toaster.
Thus, man tempts the Gods to teach him an unforgettable lesson.
The far right doesn't care and has never cared about:
* freedom of speech
* freedom of the press
* states rights
* government overreach
* wars of choice/international meddling
*. women's sports
* women ... generally
* real Americans
But most important of all they do not care about appearing hypocritical. They want to be seen as powerful, brave, unstoppable, etc. the dishonest rot of hypocrisy is just another tool.
Learn it now and forever. Expect much less from such people.
I just think "man who can't believe in anything" and "man who will believe in... anything" are a winning pair.