> Should we warn people off or help them on? "We" and "people" here are idealizations, just like we idealize LLMs as thinking entities. "We" can't warn "peopl

> Should we warn people off or help them on? "We" and "people" here are idealizations, just like we idealize LLMs as thinking entities. "We" can't warn "people". ChatGPT is a tool, and users will be users. Yes, one can label output as potentially harmful, false and deceiving. But, just like tobacco and its warnings, people still will peruse the tool because the tool does what it does, it responds in context to prompts and, even knowing it's imperfect, humans are imperfect and tend to swallow it whole. We need to push forward ours topics at hand, we desire that input, that mirroring. So now, either the tool improves its quality and accuracy or something new will have to come along. Then we can move on and forget we ever did tell ChatGPT about our problems.