3 ms·
What's good about reducing options available for therapy? If the issue is misrepresentation, there are already laws that cover this.
by olalonde 1y ago
What's good about reducing options available for therapy? If the issue is misrepresentation, there are already laws that cover this.
- dsr_ 1y agoWe've tried that, and it turns out that self-regulation doesn't work. If it did, we could live in Libertopia.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- r14c 1y agoIt's not really reducing options. There's no evidence that LLM chat bots are capable of providing effective mental health services.
- SoftTalker 1y agoFor human therapists, what’s good is that it preserves their ability to charge high fees because the demand for therapists far outstrips the supply. Who lobbied for this law anyway?
- guappa 1y agoAnd for human patients it makes sure their sensitive private information isn't entirely in the hands of some megacorp which will harvest it to use it and profit from it in some unethical way.
- lr4444lr 1y agoIt's not therapy. It's a simulated validating listening, and context-lacking suggestions. There is no more therapy being provided by an LLM than there is healing performed by a robot arm that slaps a bandage on your arm if you were to put it in the right spot and push a button to make it pivot toward you, find your arm, and spread it lightly.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]