Much of this discourse has already come out in the gambling and dark-pattern domain. Machines that adaptively seduce users by matching their behaviour are commo

Much of this discourse has already come out in the gambling and dark-pattern domain. Machines that adaptively seduce users by matching their behaviour are common in lots of gaming technology. Yes they are addictive. The idea of sycophantic, charming narcissistic psychopath bots designed to get inside your head was explored by P.K Dick and by Ray Bradbury. Perhaps it's in 'Chronicles' where the aliens lure space explorers to their deaths with a siren song that emulates their lost loved ones and "apple pie" home memories. The really sketchy side is going to be when these are used to perpetrate other frauds and confidence tricks. As "entertainment" I see this technology in the same category as spirit mediums, palm-readers, cold fortune tellers and so on. It's a new level of "carny code" for fleecing vulnerable people. I think the law will respond to it the same way. It's definitely playing with dangerous emotions. Once there's a few suicides and inconsolable broken-hearted maniacs turning up at AI-Company offices with an assault rifle and demanding "Get _her_ back or I kill everybody", then it will get regulated to hell. > all these forms of media are similarly limited by human capacity. Generative AI is different. It is also limited by human capacity, to consume. We all have an attention ceiling. Where do people find time for this? > Sherry Turkle, a preeminent psychologist +1 for Sherry's work, definitely worth a read!