3 ms·

Is there a historical pattern of folks surrounding themselves with either people who sometimes disagree (healthy) or people who always agree (risky)? Then Chat

Is there a historical pattern of folks surrounding themselves with either people who sometimes disagree (healthy) or people who always agree (risky)? Then ChatGPT could be a sanity check on thinking critically: Dave, you've agreed 218 times with me this week. Please disagree more next week, so that I may recalibrate my neutrality algorithm.

BizarroLand 4y ago
What I'm envisioning is that we would need to train AI on an ideal average model of a human being, as close to perfectly neutral in every way possible, and also teach them that actual human beings are each uniquely in one way or another both better and worse than that ideally average person. From that point, having an AI companion, say on a wristband or necklace or enabled with AR lenses of some type would be very useful in shoring up your weaknesses and improving your successes. After a long enough trial period they could also replace teachers or babysitters so long as they had some ability to physically intervene to prevent accidents or to administer first aid, stuff like that.