5 ms·

Surprised it's so low. There are 800 million users and the typical developed country has around 5±3% of the population[1] reporting at least one notable instanc

Surprised it's so low. There are 800 million users and the typical developed country has around 5±3% of the population[1] reporting at least one notable instance of suicidal feelings per year. . [1] Anybody concerned by such figures (as one justifiably should be without further context) should note that suicidality in the population is typically the result of their best approximation of the rational mind attempting to figure out an escape from a consistently negative situation under conditions of very limited information about alternatives, as is famously expressed in the David Foster Wallace quote on the topic. The phenomenon usually vanishes after gaining new, previously inaccessible information about potential opportunities and strategies.

butler533 1y ago
Why assume any of the information in this article is factual? Is there any indication any of it was verified by anyone who does not have a financial interest in "proving" a foregone conclusion? The principal author of this does not even have the courage to attach their name to it.
- OgsyedIE 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - dang 1y ago
    Yikes, you can't attack another user like this on HN, regardless of how wrong they are or you feel they are. We ban accounts that post like this, so please don't. Fortunately, a quick skim through your recent comments didn't turn up anything else like this, so it should be easy to fix. But if you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site to heart, we'd be grateful.
bawolff 1y ago
> [1] Anybody concerned by such figures (as one justifiably should be without further context) should note that suicidality in the population is typically the result of their best approximation of the rational mind attempting to figure out an escape from a consistently negative situation under conditions of very limited information about alternatives, as is famously expressed in the David Foster Wallace quote on the topic. > The phenomenon usually vanishes after gaining new, previously inaccessible information about potential opportunities and strategies. Is this actually true? (i.e. backed up by research) [I'm not neccesarily doubting, that is just different from my mental model of how suicidal thoughts work, so im just curious]
SecretDreams 1y ago
To be fair, this is week and more focused specifically on planning or intent. Over a year, you may get more unique hits to those attributes.. which I feel are both more intense indicators than just suicidal feelings on the scale of "how quickly feelings will turn to actions". Talking in the same language and timescales are important in drawing these comparisons - it very well could be that OAI's numbers are higher than what you are comparing against when normalized for the differences I've highlighted or others I've missed.
anonymous908213 1y ago
> best approximation of the rational mind attempting to figure out an escape from a consistently negative situation under conditions of very limited information about alternatives I dislike this phrasing, because it implies things can always get better if only the suicidal person were a bit less ignorant. The reality is there are countless situations from which the entire rest of your life is 99.9999% guaranteed to constitute of a highly lopsided ratio of suffering to joy. An obvious example are diseases/disabilities in which pain is severe, constant, and quality of life is permanently diminished. Short of hoping for a miracle cure to be discovered, there is no alternative and it is perfectly rational to conclude that there is no purpose to continuing to live in that circumstance, provided the person in question lives with their own happiness as a motivating factor. Less extreme conditions than disability can also lead to this, where it's possible things can get better but there's still a high degree of uncertainty around it. For example, if there's a 30% chance that after suffering miserably for 10 years your life will get better, and a 70% chance you will continue to suffer, is it irrational to commit suicide? I wouldn't say so. And so, when we start talking about suicide on the scale of millions of people ideating, I think there's a bit of folly in assuming that these people can be "fixed" by talking to them better. What would actually make people less suicidal is not being talked out of it, but an improvement to their quality of life, or at least hope for a future improvement in quality of life. That hope is hard to come by for many. In my estimation there are numerous societies in which living conditions are rapidly deteriorating, and at some point there will have to be a reckoning with the fact that rational minds conclude suicide is the way out when the alternatives are worse.
- SamPatt 1y ago
  Good comment. This is the part people don't like to talk about. We just brand people as "mentally ill" and suddenly we no longer need to consider if they're acting rationally or not. Life can be immensely difficult. I'm very skeptical that giving people AI would meaningfully change existing dynamics.
- supriyo-biswas 1y ago
  Thank you for this comment, it highlights something that I've felt that needed to be said but is often suppressed because people don't like the ultimate conclusion that occurs if you try to reason about it. A person considering suicide is often just in a terrible situation that can't be improved. While disease etc. are factors that are outside of humanity's control, other situations like being saddled with debt, unjust accusations that people feel that they cannot be recused of (e.g. Aaron Swartz) are systemic issues that one person cannot fight alone. You would see that people are very willing to say that "help is available" or some such when said person speaks about contemplating suicide, but very few people would be willing to solve someones debt issues or providing legal help, as the case may be that is the factor behind one's suicidal thoughts. At best, all you might get is a pep talk about being hopeful and how better days might come along magically. In such cases, from the perspective of the individual, it is not entirely unreasonable to want to end it. However, once it comes to that, walking back the reasoning chain leads to the fact that people and society has failed them, and therefore it is just better to apply a label on that person that they were "mental ill" or "arrogant" and could not see a better way.
babyshake 1y ago
There is another factor to consider. The stakes of asking an AI about a taboo topic are generally considered to be very low. The number of people who have asked ChatGPT something like "how to make a nuclear bomb" should not be an indication of the number of people seriously considering doing that.
- hsbauauvhabzb 1y ago
  That’s an extreme example where it’s clear to the vast majority of people asking the question that they probably do not have the means to make one. I think it’s more likely that real world actions come out of the question ‘how do I approach my neighbour about their barking dogs’ at a far higher rate. Suicide is somewhere between the two, but probably closer to the latter than the former.
saretup 1y ago
The math actually checks out. 5% of 800 million is 40 million. 40 million thoughts per year divided by 52 weeks per year approximately equals around 1 million thoughts per week.
kelnos 1y ago
That's 1 million people per week, not in general. It could be 1 million different people every week. (Probably not, but you get where I'm going with that.)

butler533 1y ago

Why assume any of the information in this article is factual? Is there any indication any of it was verified by anyone who does not have a financial interest in "proving" a foregone conclusion? The principal author of this does not even have the courage to attach their name to it.

OgsyedIE 1y ago
[flagged]
- dang 1y ago
  Yikes, you can't attack another user like this on HN, regardless of how wrong they are or you feel they are. We ban accounts that post like this, so please don't. Fortunately, a quick skim through your recent comments didn't turn up anything else like this, so it should be easy to fix. But if you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site to heart, we'd be grateful.

bawolff 1y ago

> [1] Anybody concerned by such figures (as one justifiably should be without further context) should note that suicidality in the population is typically the result of their best approximation of the rational mind attempting to figure out an escape from a consistently negative situation under conditions of very limited information about alternatives, as is famously expressed in the David Foster Wallace quote on the topic. > The phenomenon usually vanishes after gaining new, previously inaccessible information about potential opportunities and strategies. Is this actually true? (i.e. backed up by research) [I'm not neccesarily doubting, that is just different from my mental model of how suicidal thoughts work, so im just curious]

SecretDreams 1y ago

To be fair, this is week and more focused specifically on planning or intent. Over a year, you may get more unique hits to those attributes.. which I feel are both more intense indicators than just suicidal feelings on the scale of "how quickly feelings will turn to actions". Talking in the same language and timescales are important in drawing these comparisons - it very well could be that OAI's numbers are higher than what you are comparing against when normalized for the differences I've highlighted or others I've missed.

anonymous908213 1y ago

> best approximation of the rational mind attempting to figure out an escape from a consistently negative situation under conditions of very limited information about alternatives I dislike this phrasing, because it implies things can always get better if only the suicidal person were a bit less ignorant. The reality is there are countless situations from which the entire rest of your life is 99.9999% guaranteed to constitute of a highly lopsided ratio of suffering to joy. An obvious example are diseases/disabilities in which pain is severe, constant, and quality of life is permanently diminished. Short of hoping for a miracle cure to be discovered, there is no alternative and it is perfectly rational to conclude that there is no purpose to continuing to live in that circumstance, provided the person in question lives with their own happiness as a motivating factor. Less extreme conditions than disability can also lead to this, where it's possible things can get better but there's still a high degree of uncertainty around it. For example, if there's a 30% chance that after suffering miserably for 10 years your life will get better, and a 70% chance you will continue to suffer, is it irrational to commit suicide? I wouldn't say so. And so, when we start talking about suicide on the scale of millions of people ideating, I think there's a bit of folly in assuming that these people can be "fixed" by talking to them better. What would actually make people less suicidal is not being talked out of it, but an improvement to their quality of life, or at least hope for a future improvement in quality of life. That hope is hard to come by for many. In my estimation there are numerous societies in which living conditions are rapidly deteriorating, and at some point there will have to be a reckoning with the fact that rational minds conclude suicide is the way out when the alternatives are worse.

SamPatt 1y ago
Good comment. This is the part people don't like to talk about. We just brand people as "mentally ill" and suddenly we no longer need to consider if they're acting rationally or not. Life can be immensely difficult. I'm very skeptical that giving people AI would meaningfully change existing dynamics.
supriyo-biswas 1y ago
Thank you for this comment, it highlights something that I've felt that needed to be said but is often suppressed because people don't like the ultimate conclusion that occurs if you try to reason about it. A person considering suicide is often just in a terrible situation that can't be improved. While disease etc. are factors that are outside of humanity's control, other situations like being saddled with debt, unjust accusations that people feel that they cannot be recused of (e.g. Aaron Swartz) are systemic issues that one person cannot fight alone. You would see that people are very willing to say that "help is available" or some such when said person speaks about contemplating suicide, but very few people would be willing to solve someones debt issues or providing legal help, as the case may be that is the factor behind one's suicidal thoughts. At best, all you might get is a pep talk about being hopeful and how better days might come along magically. In such cases, from the perspective of the individual, it is not entirely unreasonable to want to end it. However, once it comes to that, walking back the reasoning chain leads to the fact that people and society has failed them, and therefore it is just better to apply a label on that person that they were "mental ill" or "arrogant" and could not see a better way.

babyshake 1y ago

There is another factor to consider. The stakes of asking an AI about a taboo topic are generally considered to be very low. The number of people who have asked ChatGPT something like "how to make a nuclear bomb" should not be an indication of the number of people seriously considering doing that.

hsbauauvhabzb 1y ago
That’s an extreme example where it’s clear to the vast majority of people asking the question that they probably do not have the means to make one. I think it’s more likely that real world actions come out of the question ‘how do I approach my neighbour about their barking dogs’ at a far higher rate. Suicide is somewhere between the two, but probably closer to the latter than the former.

saretup 1y ago

The math actually checks out. 5% of 800 million is 40 million. 40 million thoughts per year divided by 52 weeks per year approximately equals around 1 million thoughts per week.

kelnos 1y ago

That's 1 million people per week, not in general. It could be 1 million different people every week. (Probably not, but you get where I'm going with that.)