> Have a large part of the population always been susceptible to insane conspiracies and psychosis or is this recent phenomenon? I read this more like a questi

> Have a large part of the population always been susceptible to insane conspiracies and psychosis or is this recent phenomenon? I read this more like a question biased towards “yes” because there is nothing supporting it. > The feels less of a ChatGPT problem and something more is at play. Even if the begged-for answer is true... both things can be true. And on the specific topic of LLMs you can find ways to solve that particular problem which reduces the overall problem. Because if the root problem is “stupid people” or “naive people” or whatever else: you get less accidents if you make the territory less booby trapped. But these rhetorical topic changers—if they are indulged instead of being interrupted—tend not to approach any fruitful discussion. And that’s despite whatever intentions that the original poster had. Because the side topic then either turns towards arguing for or against the premise. Or else the premise is accepted and all we get are aw-shucks grandiose statements about how human nature is so-and-so and that etc. etc. some subset of the population will just get bamboozled anyway and technology is irrelevant and fin conversation. Yes despite the intentions of the OP who might have indeed wanted to “broaden the conversation”. Because (1) this particular topic can’t be analyzed when things are generalized so aggressively, and (2) that’s just how this misanthropic community acts on these topics. In aggregate.