3 ms·

I assumed this was about chatbot users committing suicide in order to "join" the bot they are chatting with. It's already happened a couple of times, apparentl

I assumed this was about chatbot users committing suicide in order to "join" the bot they are chatting with. It's already happened a couple of times, apparently: https://futurism.com/teen-suicide-obsessed-ai-chatbot https://futurism.com/teen-suicide-obsessed-ai-chatbot https://garymarcus.substack.com/p/the-first-known-chatbot-associated https://garymarcus.substack.com/p/the-first-known-chatbot-as...

sam0x17 2y ago
Similarly I thought it would be about ML and data projects that have become defunct due to the advent of LLMs.
nayuki 2y ago
I thought the title meant that a chatbot gave bad medical, engineering, and/or safety-critical advice that a human ended up following.
cdev_gl 2y ago
Yea, I too was not expecting a list of past benchmarks. If not the aforementioned actual human deaths, I had expected either a list of companies whose pivot to AI/LLMs led to their downfall (but I guess we're going to need to wait a year or two for that) or a list of industries (such as audio transcription) that are being killed by AI as we speak. We really do live in interesting times. Usually I feel pretty confident about predicting how a trend will continue, but as it is the only prediction I can make with confidence for this latest AI research is that it is and will be used by militaries to kill a lot of people. Oh, hey, that's another thing this article could have listed! Outside of that, all bets are open. Possible wagers include: "Turns out to be mostly useful in specific niche applications and only seemingly useful anywhere else", "Extremely useful for businesses looking to offset responsibility for unpopular decisions", "Ushers in an end to work and a golden age for all mankind", "Ushers in an end to work and a dark age for most of the world", "Combines with profit motives to damage all art, culture, and community", etc etc. I know many folk have strong opinions one way or the other, but I think it's literally anyone's game at this point, though I will say I'm not leaning optimistic.
rasz 2y ago
Using people with severe mental health problems might be a poor benchmark of performance.
- ok_dad 2y ago
  Why? Something like 20-25% of people have mental health issues. Seems like someone should be thinking about the impact of their product here, rather than blaming the victims.
aitchnyu 2y ago
I thought it was a credible source of actual jobs replaced by LLMs. When I see headlines like this, I ad homimem the source as unprofitable company CEO, big consulting firm, bootcamp seller etc.

sam0x17 2y ago

Similarly I thought it would be about ML and data projects that have become defunct due to the advent of LLMs.

nayuki 2y ago

I thought the title meant that a chatbot gave bad medical, engineering, and/or safety-critical advice that a human ended up following.

cdev_gl 2y ago

Yea, I too was not expecting a list of past benchmarks. If not the aforementioned actual human deaths, I had expected either a list of companies whose pivot to AI/LLMs led to their downfall (but I guess we're going to need to wait a year or two for that) or a list of industries (such as audio transcription) that are being killed by AI as we speak. We really do live in interesting times. Usually I feel pretty confident about predicting how a trend will continue, but as it is the only prediction I can make with confidence for this latest AI research is that it is and will be used by militaries to kill a lot of people. Oh, hey, that's another thing this article could have listed! Outside of that, all bets are open. Possible wagers include: "Turns out to be mostly useful in specific niche applications and only seemingly useful anywhere else", "Extremely useful for businesses looking to offset responsibility for unpopular decisions", "Ushers in an end to work and a golden age for all mankind", "Ushers in an end to work and a dark age for most of the world", "Combines with profit motives to damage all art, culture, and community", etc etc. I know many folk have strong opinions one way or the other, but I think it's literally anyone's game at this point, though I will say I'm not leaning optimistic.

rasz 2y ago

Using people with severe mental health problems might be a poor benchmark of performance.

ok_dad 2y ago
Why? Something like 20-25% of people have mental health issues. Seems like someone should be thinking about the impact of their product here, rather than blaming the victims.

aitchnyu 2y ago

I thought it was a credible source of actual jobs replaced by LLMs. When I see headlines like this, I ad homimem the source as unprofitable company CEO, big consulting firm, bootcamp seller etc.