3 ms·

> it already is removing human interactions from my life This is the best feature of ChatGPT for me, and the reason I pay for it.

bheadmaster 3y ago
> This is the best feature of ChatGPT for me, and the reason I pay for it. While I completely understand this sentiment, I would be wary of Service as a Software Substitute being your alternative to human contact. If we start feeling (something akin to) genuine human connection to a service, the company providing the service has a large amount leverage over us. The scene from Blade Runner 2049 comes to mind. Additionally, the emotional connection might make us an order of magnitude more vulnerable to brainwashing and psyops.
- TeMPOraL 3y ago
  Let's be more precise by what we mean by "human interactions" / "human contact" here. For example: - An alternative outlet for venting/intimate conversations than your friends/spouse? I can see a problem growing here. - A replacement/substitute for a therapist? I doubt even GPT-4 can do that job better than actual therapist (especially when face to face, not over Zoom), but there are many scenarios where ChatGPT would still be useful - perhaps one can't afford therapy, or otherwise doesn't have access to it, or one feels their issues don't warrant a proper therapy just yet. - Related to the above, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy is one technique known to be somewhat effective when done alone with a book (relative to the effectiveness of individual/group therapy). I can imagine ChatGPT making this kind of self-help easier, and more effective. I know there have been attempts to make CBT chatbots some years ago (obviously prior to "GPT revolution"), but I don't know how effective they turned out to be. - An alternative to posting questions on forums, group chats, or asking random people? IDK. maybe let's split it: -- Individuals you know, directly or via group chat, and small communities - conversations there are simultaneously transactional/object-level and create interpersonal bonds. Replacing that with ChatGPT could make one worse off. However, some people (myself included) already have difficulty with this kind of interaction, so ChatGPT here is strictly positive (both in delivering answers and helping form a habit of phrasing questions/requests instead of doing Google searches). -- Mass audience forums - Reddit, HN, Facebook comments, StackOverflow, etc. - the community might lose out a bit on reduced participation, but individually, I feel if ChatGPT can give you a satisfying answer to your question, you should use it, and relevant forums you frequent are likely better off with you not posting that question. Etc.
  - cmilton 3y ago
    >However, some people (myself included) already have difficulty with this kind of interaction, so ChatGPT here is strictly positive Do you think this technology is going to make it more difficult for people like yourself?
    - TeMPOraL 3y ago
      People like me have an issue asking people questions specifically because people-related reasons. LLMs aren't people (yet), so those reasons don't apply. So in this context, the technology is making things easier for us.
      - cmilton 3y ago
        Thank you. I wholeheartedly agree that it can make things easier. Easy in the short term may not be beneficial in the long would be my only concern.
  - yakubin 3y ago
    > - A replacement/substitute for a therapist? I doubt even GPT-4 can do that job better than actual therapist Maybe if you qualify that with “unusually good” therapist. IME even Eliza in Emacs is better than most therapists. ChatGPT surely leaves them in the dust.
    - TeMPOraL 3y ago
      > Maybe if you qualify that with “unusually good” therapist. Not "unusually good", but a working match, sure. A thing not enough people realize is that therapy is like dating. Not every therapist is going to be a "good match" for you, so if things don't seem to click for some reason, just thank them and go look for another one. > IME even Eliza in Emacs is better than most therapists. ChatGPT surely leaves them in the dust. If limited to textual channel, maybe. But a real therapy will have at least the visual channel (if on Zoom), or full presence (if in person) - there's a lot of information relevant to therapy that gets communicated this way. Tone, cadence, uncontrolled reactions, body language, etc. That alone gives even a mediocre therapist a leg up in this comparison.
- surgical_fire 3y ago
  > If we start feeling (something akin to) genuine human connection to a service I don't. I see it as a tool, and I treat it as a tool. I don't have with it any more of a human connection than I have with IntelliJ where I type my code or the Linux Mint where it runs. Meaning - I like the tool, but that's about it. On the other hand, I also don't have any genuine human connection with the random humans I happened to interact on the internet. In a sense, they are just text on a screen, and could be bots for all I care.
bleep_bloop 3y ago
This. While not me personally, there is obviously a market (Japan comes to mind) for virtual, non-human based interactions and relationships. While it seems pretty clear to me subjectively that removing human interaction from your life has a negative effect it's still desired by some and they're entitled to that.
- 0zemp2c 3y ago
  The very last thing shut-in men in Japan need is a SaaS virtual girlfriend
  - EniasCailliau 3y ago
    What if it helps them gain confidence? You could see a AI companion as a safe space to explore social interaction.
  - bleep_bloop 3y ago
    i don't disagree with you, but if you're already terminally online whats the difference. The internet and social media has exacerbated a societal problem that has always existed, so now we have the problem why not make it more meaningful and less depressing.
jakkos 3y ago
I agree that removing some human interactions from my life is good. I vastly prefer self-checkouts in shops. However, I know I'm quite content spending my time alone. Being forced to go and interact with people when I want to talk about ideas or ask questions keeps my "alone tendency" in balance, and has lead to really meaningful conversations and friendships.
- TeMPOraL 3y ago
  > I agree that removing some human interactions from my life is good. I vastly prefer self-checkouts in shops. Curious example. Personally, I hate self-checkouts machines, and consider them an example of stores abusing their "stickiness" to profit at the expense of both customers and employees, and get away with it. First of all, like most "self service" solution, it's basically making the user/customer do the work that, before, was done by the service. Secondly, it's just plain less efficient. You need some 3-4 self-checkout machines and a dedicated person to watch them (to e.g. approve alcohol purchases), just to replace one clerk and their station, while keeping throughput more-less the same. What the stores do instead is, install 2 stations per replaced cashier, and have existing employees do the "watch duty" - which is why half the self-checkout machines end up being stuck for 5 minutes at a time, waiting for the overworked employee to finish resupplying a shelf, and walk all the way to the checkout arena to swipe their card a few times. The queues get longer, people get more aggressive, everyone is doing unpaid work for the store. Madness.
  - hasbot 3y ago
    Heh, I find self checkout more efficient. I use multiple bags when bagging and pre-sort items based on where they go in my kitchen. Plus most baggers are terrible at bagging and just resort to a massive number of bags which kinda ignores the purpose of the bags.
    - TeMPOraL 3y ago
      I haven't been to shop with baggers, so that time is more-less constant for me (except for the pressure to bag faster, which isn't present with self-checkout). However, the cashiers are absurdly fast at scanning. Their workstation is optimized for this, and they scan through things faster than I can move them into bags. Even without any exceptional circumstances that make you wait for assistance at self-service checkout, scanning speed alone cuts the time per customer at least by half.
pluijzer 3y ago
For me, asking something on the Internet, like on stackoverflow is usually, the very last option. I am too afraid to get ridiculed for it or get scolded for not having put enough effort in my question that already feels more as a thesis. Maybe this is just me and this does not reflect reality but I do have the nagging feeling I a bother somebody with it and it gives a bit of stress. Not so with ChatGPT, I can just ask away and it will always happily give me an answer (unfortunately also when it didn't really know a good one). Though I am happy for the people that just continue asking questions to actual humans and those answering it, if only to continue to feed the model ;)
- circuit10 3y ago
  It’s not just you, I also tend to ask people as a last resort
  - c1sc0 3y ago
    Same here. And in many ways it’s been the curse of my life.
- whstl 3y ago
  As someone who never asked a question in StackOverflow for what are probably similar reasons (despite being in this career for 20 years), I still find that ChatGPT in this regard is still more like a Google or an improved StackOverflow/documentation search… It can infer some things, modify variable names to match mine, but for the real hairy stuff I still gotta do the legwork myself, normally by reaching out for the source code.
  - surgical_fire 3y ago
    > I still find that ChatGPT in this regard is still more like a Google or an improved StackOverflow/documentation search… I agree. And for that reason, it is an excellent tool.
  - EniasCailliau 3y ago
    Have you tried AutoGPT? I've heard that it can do a bit more through iteration. Haven't tried it out yet for coding hard problems.
neuronic 3y ago
But that depends on which interactions it replaces. There are people I don't want to talk to. Not always because I don't like them but because it's technicalities and unrewarding forced interactions. For example, clerks at the tax office who just do their job. But on the other hand, there are interactions which I really don't want to miss! "Girlfriend" GPT is already targeting the most intricate and joyful interactions in my life: my SO. Let's say we break up and I fall into a depression. Instead of recovering and moving on, will I install a personal OSS AI companion to save myself the hassle of modern dating? Therefore preventing myself from attempting novel interactions sooner? Or will it help me instead to overcome a dark period and prime me for the future? Can it help people combat loneliness - a disease widespread and not to be trifled with? Or will it enhance loneliness by effectively fooling your brain into not caring anymore because you can just open an app? At what point will it not matter anymore because saving someone from depression is more valuable than keeping it "real" at all times?
- surgical_fire 3y ago
  > Can it help people combat loneliness - a disease widespread and not to be trifled with? Is loneliness a disease? It's an honest question. I never saw it as an issue. I tend to be a loner, but in a sense I was also never truly lonely.
  - TeMPOraL 3y ago
    It's definitely a "civilizational disease" - a widespread condition that has deteriorating effect on mental health and happiness, noticeable at scale, caused by... the structure and pressures of modern living in urbanized, developed countries. It's also not something most individuals can "just fix" on their own through lifestyle intervention.
  - Barrin92 3y ago
    Yes. Loneliness is associated with extremely negative health outcomes comparable to physical disease, and some countries like the UK have gone as far as creating a dedicated minister to tackle the issue. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/loneliness-minister-its-more-important-than-ever-to-take-action https://www.gov.uk/government/news/loneliness-minister-its-m...

bheadmaster 3y ago

> This is the best feature of ChatGPT for me, and the reason I pay for it. While I completely understand this sentiment, I would be wary of Service as a Software Substitute being your alternative to human contact. If we start feeling (something akin to) genuine human connection to a service, the company providing the service has a large amount leverage over us. The scene from Blade Runner 2049 comes to mind. Additionally, the emotional connection might make us an order of magnitude more vulnerable to brainwashing and psyops.

TeMPOraL 3y ago
Let's be more precise by what we mean by "human interactions" / "human contact" here. For example: - An alternative outlet for venting/intimate conversations than your friends/spouse? I can see a problem growing here. - A replacement/substitute for a therapist? I doubt even GPT-4 can do that job better than actual therapist (especially when face to face, not over Zoom), but there are many scenarios where ChatGPT would still be useful - perhaps one can't afford therapy, or otherwise doesn't have access to it, or one feels their issues don't warrant a proper therapy just yet. - Related to the above, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy is one technique known to be somewhat effective when done alone with a book (relative to the effectiveness of individual/group therapy). I can imagine ChatGPT making this kind of self-help easier, and more effective. I know there have been attempts to make CBT chatbots some years ago (obviously prior to "GPT revolution"), but I don't know how effective they turned out to be. - An alternative to posting questions on forums, group chats, or asking random people? IDK. maybe let's split it: -- Individuals you know, directly or via group chat, and small communities - conversations there are simultaneously transactional/object-level and create interpersonal bonds. Replacing that with ChatGPT could make one worse off. However, some people (myself included) already have difficulty with this kind of interaction, so ChatGPT here is strictly positive (both in delivering answers and helping form a habit of phrasing questions/requests instead of doing Google searches). -- Mass audience forums - Reddit, HN, Facebook comments, StackOverflow, etc. - the community might lose out a bit on reduced participation, but individually, I feel if ChatGPT can give you a satisfying answer to your question, you should use it, and relevant forums you frequent are likely better off with you not posting that question. Etc.
- cmilton 3y ago
  >However, some people (myself included) already have difficulty with this kind of interaction, so ChatGPT here is strictly positive Do you think this technology is going to make it more difficult for people like yourself?
  - TeMPOraL 3y ago
    People like me have an issue asking people questions specifically because people-related reasons. LLMs aren't people (yet), so those reasons don't apply. So in this context, the technology is making things easier for us.
    - cmilton 3y ago
      Thank you. I wholeheartedly agree that it can make things easier. Easy in the short term may not be beneficial in the long would be my only concern.
- yakubin 3y ago
  > - A replacement/substitute for a therapist? I doubt even GPT-4 can do that job better than actual therapist Maybe if you qualify that with “unusually good” therapist. IME even Eliza in Emacs is better than most therapists. ChatGPT surely leaves them in the dust.
  - TeMPOraL 3y ago
    > Maybe if you qualify that with “unusually good” therapist. Not "unusually good", but a working match, sure. A thing not enough people realize is that therapy is like dating. Not every therapist is going to be a "good match" for you, so if things don't seem to click for some reason, just thank them and go look for another one. > IME even Eliza in Emacs is better than most therapists. ChatGPT surely leaves them in the dust. If limited to textual channel, maybe. But a real therapy will have at least the visual channel (if on Zoom), or full presence (if in person) - there's a lot of information relevant to therapy that gets communicated this way. Tone, cadence, uncontrolled reactions, body language, etc. That alone gives even a mediocre therapist a leg up in this comparison.
surgical_fire 3y ago
> If we start feeling (something akin to) genuine human connection to a service I don't. I see it as a tool, and I treat it as a tool. I don't have with it any more of a human connection than I have with IntelliJ where I type my code or the Linux Mint where it runs. Meaning - I like the tool, but that's about it. On the other hand, I also don't have any genuine human connection with the random humans I happened to interact on the internet. In a sense, they are just text on a screen, and could be bots for all I care.

bleep_bloop 3y ago

This. While not me personally, there is obviously a market (Japan comes to mind) for virtual, non-human based interactions and relationships. While it seems pretty clear to me subjectively that removing human interaction from your life has a negative effect it's still desired by some and they're entitled to that.

0zemp2c 3y ago
The very last thing shut-in men in Japan need is a SaaS virtual girlfriend
- EniasCailliau 3y ago
  What if it helps them gain confidence? You could see a AI companion as a safe space to explore social interaction.
- bleep_bloop 3y ago
  i don't disagree with you, but if you're already terminally online whats the difference. The internet and social media has exacerbated a societal problem that has always existed, so now we have the problem why not make it more meaningful and less depressing.

jakkos 3y ago

I agree that removing some human interactions from my life is good. I vastly prefer self-checkouts in shops. However, I know I'm quite content spending my time alone. Being forced to go and interact with people when I want to talk about ideas or ask questions keeps my "alone tendency" in balance, and has lead to really meaningful conversations and friendships.

TeMPOraL 3y ago
> I agree that removing some human interactions from my life is good. I vastly prefer self-checkouts in shops. Curious example. Personally, I hate self-checkouts machines, and consider them an example of stores abusing their "stickiness" to profit at the expense of both customers and employees, and get away with it. First of all, like most "self service" solution, it's basically making the user/customer do the work that, before, was done by the service. Secondly, it's just plain less efficient. You need some 3-4 self-checkout machines and a dedicated person to watch them (to e.g. approve alcohol purchases), just to replace one clerk and their station, while keeping throughput more-less the same. What the stores do instead is, install 2 stations per replaced cashier, and have existing employees do the "watch duty" - which is why half the self-checkout machines end up being stuck for 5 minutes at a time, waiting for the overworked employee to finish resupplying a shelf, and walk all the way to the checkout arena to swipe their card a few times. The queues get longer, people get more aggressive, everyone is doing unpaid work for the store. Madness.
- hasbot 3y ago
  Heh, I find self checkout more efficient. I use multiple bags when bagging and pre-sort items based on where they go in my kitchen. Plus most baggers are terrible at bagging and just resort to a massive number of bags which kinda ignores the purpose of the bags.
  - TeMPOraL 3y ago
    I haven't been to shop with baggers, so that time is more-less constant for me (except for the pressure to bag faster, which isn't present with self-checkout). However, the cashiers are absurdly fast at scanning. Their workstation is optimized for this, and they scan through things faster than I can move them into bags. Even without any exceptional circumstances that make you wait for assistance at self-service checkout, scanning speed alone cuts the time per customer at least by half.

pluijzer 3y ago

For me, asking something on the Internet, like on stackoverflow is usually, the very last option. I am too afraid to get ridiculed for it or get scolded for not having put enough effort in my question that already feels more as a thesis. Maybe this is just me and this does not reflect reality but I do have the nagging feeling I a bother somebody with it and it gives a bit of stress. Not so with ChatGPT, I can just ask away and it will always happily give me an answer (unfortunately also when it didn't really know a good one). Though I am happy for the people that just continue asking questions to actual humans and those answering it, if only to continue to feed the model ;)

circuit10 3y ago
It’s not just you, I also tend to ask people as a last resort
- c1sc0 3y ago
  Same here. And in many ways it’s been the curse of my life.
whstl 3y ago
As someone who never asked a question in StackOverflow for what are probably similar reasons (despite being in this career for 20 years), I still find that ChatGPT in this regard is still more like a Google or an improved StackOverflow/documentation search… It can infer some things, modify variable names to match mine, but for the real hairy stuff I still gotta do the legwork myself, normally by reaching out for the source code.
- surgical_fire 3y ago
  > I still find that ChatGPT in this regard is still more like a Google or an improved StackOverflow/documentation search… I agree. And for that reason, it is an excellent tool.
- EniasCailliau 3y ago
  Have you tried AutoGPT? I've heard that it can do a bit more through iteration. Haven't tried it out yet for coding hard problems.

neuronic 3y ago

But that depends on which interactions it replaces. There are people I don't want to talk to. Not always because I don't like them but because it's technicalities and unrewarding forced interactions. For example, clerks at the tax office who just do their job. But on the other hand, there are interactions which I really don't want to miss! "Girlfriend" GPT is already targeting the most intricate and joyful interactions in my life: my SO. Let's say we break up and I fall into a depression. Instead of recovering and moving on, will I install a personal OSS AI companion to save myself the hassle of modern dating? Therefore preventing myself from attempting novel interactions sooner? Or will it help me instead to overcome a dark period and prime me for the future? Can it help people combat loneliness - a disease widespread and not to be trifled with? Or will it enhance loneliness by effectively fooling your brain into not caring anymore because you can just open an app? At what point will it not matter anymore because saving someone from depression is more valuable than keeping it "real" at all times?

surgical_fire 3y ago
> Can it help people combat loneliness - a disease widespread and not to be trifled with? Is loneliness a disease? It's an honest question. I never saw it as an issue. I tend to be a loner, but in a sense I was also never truly lonely.
- TeMPOraL 3y ago
  It's definitely a "civilizational disease" - a widespread condition that has deteriorating effect on mental health and happiness, noticeable at scale, caused by... the structure and pressures of modern living in urbanized, developed countries. It's also not something most individuals can "just fix" on their own through lifestyle intervention.
- Barrin92 3y ago
  Yes. Loneliness is associated with extremely negative health outcomes comparable to physical disease, and some countries like the UK have gone as far as creating a dedicated minister to tackle the issue. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/loneliness-minister-its-more-important-than-ever-to-take-action https://www.gov.uk/government/news/loneliness-minister-its-m...