3 ms·

I want friends too but man, resorting to a chatbot sounds so depressing. Get some hobbies, find activities on Meetup, join a church. So many healthier alternati

I want friends too but man, resorting to a chatbot sounds so depressing. Get some hobbies, find activities on Meetup, join a church. So many healthier alternatives. Just requires you to actually do something real.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
llm_trw 2y ago
What do we do when reality is a distant second to digital simulation? We're just seeing sparks of AI starting and it's already beating out people for tasks which were thought to be innately unautomatable. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uE96qUlJ_4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uE96qUlJ_4
- mrinfinitiesx 2y ago
  > What do we do when reality is a distant second to digital simulation? We don't do anything. People already have phones in their faces and screens as their main source of light all day. We go outside. Hang out with people. Form meaningful relationships. Biking. Hiking. Have fun. Enjoyment. Fulfillment. Loneliness and stress are killers. Digital simulation aint no solution.
  - llm_trw 2y ago
    So your argument against digital simulation is that currently digital simulation isn't good enough today so it will never be good enough? May I introduce you to the exponential function? It's a little something that's been carrying the whole field of digital computers on it's back since the 1970s.
    - haswell 2y ago
      I’m not convinced that a more perfect simulation can meet the needs of a human psyche in the long run. I think we vastly underestimate our own complexity in this regard. Whatever the case, we’re certainly nowhere close at the moment.
- xivzgrev 2y ago
  Then it’s basically porn. A short term “better” solution that undermines longer term satisfaction. Porn, junk food, etc The thing about people is they’re people. They’re different. It can be hard. They’re selfish. But there can be joy in our differences, and real meaning when someone actually cares. Vs a chatbot who is centered around you. It might feel good but it’s not a real relationship of give and take.
  - llm_trw 2y ago
    Funny you should mention porn: ai generated porn is now better than the real thing for images and >5s clips. At current rates for Moore's Law we're going to have 5 minute clips of anything you desire within the next decade on the equivalent of a 4090. I wonder if we will start having people demand we go back to real human porn like in the good old days because it's just not natural to jack it to photo realistic catgirl dominatrices.
    - nothal 2y ago
      TBH, Porn is very clearly one of those things that there's basically no intrinsic added value to your life by consuming. Think cigarettes or fentanyl. Something, that, if most people could press a button to make themselves never ever use it again, they would. > I wonder if we will start having people demand we go back to real human porn like in the good old days because it's just not natural to jack it to photo realistic catgirl dominatrices. All that to say that, in the future, I think the more likely option is that people begin to treat it as a harmful, addictive substance and, that, hopefully, it becomes much more acceptable to seek out public treatment and support for using it.
      - llm_trw 2y ago
        Only if you're an oppressed puritan. I can make the case much more convincingly that food gives basically no intrinsic added value to your life and if most people could press a button to make themselves never eat again, they would. Or to quote someone who said it much better than I: If only it were as easy to banish hunger by rubbing my belly. -Diogenes on public masturbation.
seesawtron 2y ago
For a lot of people, such options are not possible, e.g., elderly, sick, bed-ridden, socially challenged or so on. You underestimate the need and impact of such technology.
- jsheard 2y ago
  If the elderly, sick and bedridden can talk to a computer they can also talk to real people through the computer. For the socially challenged I get where you're coming from, but the question is whether it would help them to develop their social skills or whether they would just become dependent on the chatbot and withdraw even further from the real world.
  - andersa 2y ago
    The goal is not to develop social skills. The goal is to not need them, without being lonely.
  - realce 2y ago
    > If the elderly, sick and bedridden can talk to a computer they can also talk to real people through the computer. If this is so dependably true, then why does this population still suffer loneliness? How many hours of your day do you devote to zoom chats with lonely old people? I ultimately support your side of the debate - that digital simulation is not a true medicine - but without being honest about humans and human nature, you create empty arguments. Some in this thread call pornography useless, call cigarettes useless, call drugs useless. However those products are used endlessly and with great satisfaction by billions of humans throughout thousands of years. It's simply not true - these things are useful to humans, quite obviously. What causes this puritanical disposition regarding human needs and satisfaction while also literally arguing for humanism vs synthetic encroachment? Without acknowledgement of what humans actually are we won't find a real reason that AI chatbots shouldn't replace them. You speak as if the "real world" for a bedridden and lonely individual is something that they should just endure and enjoy, but you would never choose to switch places with such a person.
adamredwoods 2y ago
>> resorting to a chatbot sounds so depressing I'm very curious to these harsh negative reactions to solving a bit of loneliness with a chatbot. 1. Read the study. 2. I don't think this is suggested to be a permanent solution. 3. Some people suffer from chronic loneliness, and these negative reactions could possibly prevent others from seeking the help they need. In other words, if I'm lonely, I would not want to talk to these people because they do not seem sympathetic. Yet a chatbot is. Huh.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

llm_trw 2y ago

What do we do when reality is a distant second to digital simulation? We're just seeing sparks of AI starting and it's already beating out people for tasks which were thought to be innately unautomatable. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uE96qUlJ_4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uE96qUlJ_4

mrinfinitiesx 2y ago
> What do we do when reality is a distant second to digital simulation? We don't do anything. People already have phones in their faces and screens as their main source of light all day. We go outside. Hang out with people. Form meaningful relationships. Biking. Hiking. Have fun. Enjoyment. Fulfillment. Loneliness and stress are killers. Digital simulation aint no solution.
- llm_trw 2y ago
  So your argument against digital simulation is that currently digital simulation isn't good enough today so it will never be good enough? May I introduce you to the exponential function? It's a little something that's been carrying the whole field of digital computers on it's back since the 1970s.
  - haswell 2y ago
    I’m not convinced that a more perfect simulation can meet the needs of a human psyche in the long run. I think we vastly underestimate our own complexity in this regard. Whatever the case, we’re certainly nowhere close at the moment.
xivzgrev 2y ago
Then it’s basically porn. A short term “better” solution that undermines longer term satisfaction. Porn, junk food, etc The thing about people is they’re people. They’re different. It can be hard. They’re selfish. But there can be joy in our differences, and real meaning when someone actually cares. Vs a chatbot who is centered around you. It might feel good but it’s not a real relationship of give and take.
- llm_trw 2y ago
  Funny you should mention porn: ai generated porn is now better than the real thing for images and >5s clips. At current rates for Moore's Law we're going to have 5 minute clips of anything you desire within the next decade on the equivalent of a 4090. I wonder if we will start having people demand we go back to real human porn like in the good old days because it's just not natural to jack it to photo realistic catgirl dominatrices.
  - nothal 2y ago
    TBH, Porn is very clearly one of those things that there's basically no intrinsic added value to your life by consuming. Think cigarettes or fentanyl. Something, that, if most people could press a button to make themselves never ever use it again, they would. > I wonder if we will start having people demand we go back to real human porn like in the good old days because it's just not natural to jack it to photo realistic catgirl dominatrices. All that to say that, in the future, I think the more likely option is that people begin to treat it as a harmful, addictive substance and, that, hopefully, it becomes much more acceptable to seek out public treatment and support for using it.
    - llm_trw 2y ago
      Only if you're an oppressed puritan. I can make the case much more convincingly that food gives basically no intrinsic added value to your life and if most people could press a button to make themselves never eat again, they would. Or to quote someone who said it much better than I: If only it were as easy to banish hunger by rubbing my belly. -Diogenes on public masturbation.

seesawtron 2y ago

For a lot of people, such options are not possible, e.g., elderly, sick, bed-ridden, socially challenged or so on. You underestimate the need and impact of such technology.

jsheard 2y ago
If the elderly, sick and bedridden can talk to a computer they can also talk to real people through the computer. For the socially challenged I get where you're coming from, but the question is whether it would help them to develop their social skills or whether they would just become dependent on the chatbot and withdraw even further from the real world.
- andersa 2y ago
  The goal is not to develop social skills. The goal is to not need them, without being lonely.
- realce 2y ago
  > If the elderly, sick and bedridden can talk to a computer they can also talk to real people through the computer. If this is so dependably true, then why does this population still suffer loneliness? How many hours of your day do you devote to zoom chats with lonely old people? I ultimately support your side of the debate - that digital simulation is not a true medicine - but without being honest about humans and human nature, you create empty arguments. Some in this thread call pornography useless, call cigarettes useless, call drugs useless. However those products are used endlessly and with great satisfaction by billions of humans throughout thousands of years. It's simply not true - these things are useful to humans, quite obviously. What causes this puritanical disposition regarding human needs and satisfaction while also literally arguing for humanism vs synthetic encroachment? Without acknowledgement of what humans actually are we won't find a real reason that AI chatbots shouldn't replace them. You speak as if the "real world" for a bedridden and lonely individual is something that they should just endure and enjoy, but you would never choose to switch places with such a person.

adamredwoods 2y ago

>> resorting to a chatbot sounds so depressing I'm very curious to these harsh negative reactions to solving a bit of loneliness with a chatbot. 1. Read the study. 2. I don't think this is suggested to be a permanent solution. 3. Some people suffer from chronic loneliness, and these negative reactions could possibly prevent others from seeking the help they need. In other words, if I'm lonely, I would not want to talk to these people because they do not seem sympathetic. Yet a chatbot is. Huh.