• AizawaC47@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 hour ago

    This reminds me of the movie Her. But it’s far worse in a romantic compatibility, relationship and friendship that is throughout the movie. This just goes way too deep in the delusional and almost psychotic of insanity. Like it’s tearing people apart for self delusional ideologies to cater to individuals because AI is good at it. The movie was prophetic and showed us what the future could be, but instead it got worse.

  • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Meanwhile for centuries we’ve had religion but that’s a fine delusion for people to have according to the majority of the population.

      • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Right, immediately made me think of TempleOS, where were the articles then claiming people are losing loved ones to programming fueled spiritual fantasies.

    • MTK@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I’ve seen people dumber than ChatGPT, it definitely isn’t sentient but I can see why someone who talks to a computer that they perceive as intelligent would assume sentience.

      • Patch@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Turing made a strategic blunder when formulating the Turing Test by assuming that everyone was as smart as he was.

  • FourWaveforms@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    The article talks of ChatGPT “inducing” this psychotic/schizoid behavior.

    ChatGPT can’t do any such thing. It can’t change your personality organization. Those people were already there, at risk, masking high enough to get by until they could find their personal Messiahs.

    It’s very clear to me that LLM training needs to include protections against getting dragged into a paranoid/delusional fantasy world. People who are significantly on that spectrum (as well as borderline personality organization) are routinely left behind in many ways.

    This is just another area where society is not designed to properly account for or serve people with “cluster” disorders.

    • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      I mean, I think ChatGPT can “induce” such schizoid behavior in the same way a strobe light can “induce” seizures. Neither machine is twisting its mustache while hatching its dastardly plan, they’re dead machines that produce stimuli that aren’t healthy for certain people.

      Thinking back to college psychology class and reading about horrendously unethical studies that definitely wouldn’t fly today. Well here’s one. Let’s issue every anglophone a sniveling yes man and see what happens.

      • DancingBear@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        No, the light is causing a phsical reaction. The LLM is nothing like a strobe light…

        These people are already high functioning schizophrenic and having psychotic episodes, it’s just that seeing random strings of likely to come next letters and words is part of their psychotic episode. If it wasn’t the LLM it would be random letters on license plates that drive by, or the coindence that red lights cause traffic to stop every few minutes.

  • 7rokhym@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    21 hours ago

    I think OpenAI’s recent sycophant issue has cause a new spike in these stories. One thing I noticed was these observations from these models running on my PC saying it’s rare for a person to think and do things that I do.

    The problem is that this is a model running on my GPU. It has never talked to another person. I hate insincere compliments let alone overt flattery, so I was annoyed, but it did make me think that this kind of talk would be crack for a conspiracy nut or mentally unwell people. It’s a whole risk area I hadn’t been aware of.

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/openai-says-its-identified-why-chatgpt-became-a-groveling-sycophant/ar-AA1E4LaV

    • morrowind@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      13 hours ago

      saying it’s rare for a person to think and do things that I do.

      probably one of the most common flattery I see. I’ve tried lots of models, on device and larger cloud ones. It happens during normal conversation, technical conversation, roleplay, general testing… you name it.

      Though it makes me think… these models are trained on like internet text and whatever, none of which really show that most people think quite a lot privately and when they feel like they can talk

    • tehn00bi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Humans are always looking for a god in a machine, or a bush, in a cave, in the sky, in a tree… the ability to rationalize and see through difficult to explain situations has never been a human strong point.

  • Satellaview@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    23 hours ago

    This happened to a close friend of mine. He was already on the edge, with some weird opinions and beliefs… but he was talking with real people who could push back.

    When he switched to spending basically every waking moment with an AI that could reinforce and iterate on his bizarre beliefs 24/7, he went completely off the deep end, fast and hard. We even had him briefly hospitalized and they shrugged, basically saying “nothing chemically wrong here, dude’s just weird.”

    He and his chatbot are building a whole parallel universe, and we can’t get reality inside it.

    • sowitzer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      20 minutes ago

      This seems like an extension of social media and the internet. Weird people who talked at the bar or in the street corner were not taken seriously and didn’t get followers and lots of people who agree with them. They were isolated in their thoughts. Then social media made that possible with little work. These people were a group and could reinforce their beliefs. Now these chatbots and stuff let them liv in a fantasy world.

  • perestroika@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    From the article (emphasis mine):

    Having read his chat logs, she only found that the AI was “talking to him as if he is the next messiah.” The replies to her story were full of similar anecdotes about loved ones suddenly falling down rabbit holes of spiritual mania, supernatural delusion, and arcane prophecy — all of it fueled by AI. Some came to believe they had been chosen for a sacred mission of revelation, others that they had conjured true sentience from the software.

    /…/

    “It would tell him everything he said was beautiful, cosmic, groundbreaking,” she says.

    From elsewhere:

    Sycophancy in GPT-4o: What happened and what we’re doing about it

    We have rolled back last week’s GPT‑4o update in ChatGPT so people are now using an earlier version with more balanced behavior. The update we removed was overly flattering or agreeable—often described as sycophantic.

    I don’t know what large language model these people used, but evidence of some language models exhibiting response patterns that people interpret as sycophantic (praising or encouraging the user needlessly) is not new. Neither is hallucinatory behaviour.

    Apparently, people who are susceptible and close to falling over the edge, may end up pushing themselves over the edge with AI assistance.

    What I suspect: someone has trained their LLM on somethig like religious literature, fiction about religious experiences, or descriptions of religious experiences. If the AI is suitably prompted, it can re-enact such scenarios in text, while adapting the experience to the user at least somewhat. To a person susceptible to religious illusions (and let’s not deny it, people are suscpecptible to finding deep meaning and purpose with shallow evidence), apparently an LLM can play the role of an indoctrinating co-believer, indoctrinating prophet or supportive follower.

    • morrowind@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      13 hours ago

      If you find yourself in weird corners of the internet, schizo-posters and “spiritual” people generate staggering amounts of text

      • perestroika@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        21 hours ago

        I think Elon was having the opposite kind of problems, with Grok not validating its users nearly enough, despite Elon instructing employees to make it so. :)

  • randomname@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    23 hours ago

    I think that people give shows like the walking dead too much shit for having dumb characters when people in real life are far stupider

    • Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Like farmers who refuse to let the government plant shelter belts to preserve our top soil all because they don’t want to take a 5% hit on their yields… So instead we’re going to deplete our top soil in 50 years and future generations will be completely fucked because creating 1 inch of top soil takes 500 years.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        23 hours ago

        Even if the soil is preserved, we’ve been mining the micronutrients from it and generally only replacing the 3 main macros for centuries. It’s one of the reasons why mass produced produce doesn’t taste as good as home grown or wild food. Nutritional value keeps going down because each time food is harvested and shipped away to be consumed and then shat out into a septic tank or waste processing facility, it doesn’t end up back in the soil as a part of nutrient cycles like it did when everything was wilder. Similar story for meat eating nutrients in a pasture.

        Insects did contribute to the cycle, since they still shit and die everywhere, but their numbers are dropping rapidly, too.

        At some point, I think we’re going to have to mine the sea floor for nutrients and ship that to farms for any food to be more nutritious than junk food. Salmon farms set up in ways that block wild salmon from making it back inland doesn’t help balance out all of the nutrients that get washed out to sea all the time, too.

        It’s like humanity is specifically trying to speedrun extiction by ignoring and taking for granted how things work that we depend on.

        • Usernameblankface@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          19 hours ago

          Why would good nutrients end up in poop?

          It makes sense that growing a whole plant takes a lot of different things from the soil, and coating the area with a basic fertilizer that may or may not get washed away with the next rain doesn’t replenish all of what is taken makes sense.

          But how would adding human poop to the soil help replenish things that humans need out of food?

          • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            18 hours ago

            We don’t absorb everything completely, so some passes through unabsorbed. Some are passed via bile or mucous production, like manganese, copper, and zinc. Others are passed via urine. Some are passed via sweat. Selenium, when experiencing selenium toxicity, will even pass through your breath.

            Other than the last one, most of those eventually end up going down the drain, either in the toilet, down the shower drain, or when we do our laundry. Though some portion ends up as dust.

            And to be thorough, there’s also bleeding as a pathway to losing nutrients, as well as injuries (or surgeries) involving losing flesh, tears, spit/boogers, hair loss, lactation, finger nail and skin loss, reproductive fluids, blistering, and mensturation. And corpse disposal, though the amount of nutrients we shed throughout our lives dwarfs what’s left at the end.

            I think each one of those are ones that, due to our way of life and how it’s changed since our hunter gatherer days, less of it ends up back in the nutrient cycle.

            But I was mistaken to put the emphasis on shit and it was an interesting dive to understand that better. Thanks for challenging that :)

    • Daggity@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      23 hours ago

      Covid gave me an extremely different perspective on the zombie apocalypse. They’re going to have zombie immunization parties where everyone gets the virus.

  • lenz@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    I read the article. This is exactly what happened when my best friend got schizophrenia. I think the people affected by this were probably already prone to psychosis/on the verge of becoming schizophrenic, and that ChatGPT is merely the mechanism by which their psychosis manifested. If AI didn’t exist, it would’ve probably been Astrology or Conspiracy Theories or QAnon or whatever that ended up triggering this within people who were already prone to psychosis. But the problem with ChatGPT in particular is that is validates the psychosis… that is very bad.

    ChatGPT actively screwing with mentally ill people is a huge problem you can’t just blame on stupidity like some people in these comments are. This is exploitation of a vulnerable group of people whose brains lack the mechanisms to defend against this stuff. They can’t help it. That’s what psychosis is. This is awful.

    • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      31 minutes ago

      If AI didn’t exist, it would’ve probably been Astrology or Conspiracy Theories or QAnon or whatever that ended up triggering this within people who were already prone to psychosis.

      Or hearing the Beatles White Album and believing it tells you that a race war is coming and you should work to spark it off, then hide in the desert for a time only to return at the right moment to save the day and take over LA. That one caused several murders.

      But the problem with ChatGPT in particular is that is validates the psychosis… that is very bad.

      If you’re sufficiently detached from reality, nearly anything validates the psychosis.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      the problem with ChatGPT in particular is that is validates the psychosis… that is very bad.

      So do astrology and conspiracy theory groups on forums and other forms of social media, the main difference is whether you’re getting that validation from humans or a machine. To me, that’s a pretty unhelpful distinction, and we attack both problems the same way: early detection and treatment.

      Maybe computers can help with the early detection part. They certainly can’t do much worse than what’s currently happening.

      • lenz@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        I think having that kind of validation at your fingertips, whenever you want, is worse. At least people, even people deep in the claws of a conspiracy, can disagree with each other. At least they know what they are saying. The AI always says what the user wants to hear and expects to hear. Though I can see how that distinction may matter little to some, I just think ChatGPT has advantages that are worse than what a forum could do.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Sure. But on the flip side, you can ask it the opposite question (tell me the issues with <belief>) and it’ll do that as well, and you’re not going to get that from a conspiracy theory forum.

          • qarbone@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 hours ago

            I don’t have personal experience with people suffering psychoses but I would think that, if you have the werewithal to ask questions about the opposite beliefs, you’d be noticeably less likely to get suckered into scams and conspiracies.

    • Maeve@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      I think this is largely people seeking confirmation their delusions are real, and wherever they find it is what they’re going to attach to themselves.

  • Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    In that sense, Westgate explains, the bot dialogues are not unlike talk therapy, “which we know to be quite effective at helping people reframe their stories.” Critically, though, AI, “unlike a therapist, does not have the person’s best interests in mind, or a moral grounding or compass in what a ‘good story’ looks like,” she says. “A good therapist would not encourage a client to make sense of difficulties in their life by encouraging them to believe they have supernatural powers. Instead, they try to steer clients away from unhealthy narratives, and toward healthier ones. ChatGPT has no such constraints or concerns.”

    This is a rather terrifying take. Particularly when combined with the earlier passage about the man who claimed that “AI helped him recover a repressed memory of a babysitter trying to drown him as a toddler.” Therapists have to be very careful because human memory is very plastic. It’s very easy to alter a memory, in fact, every time you remember something, you alter it just a little bit. Under questioning by an authority figure, such as a therapist or a policeman if you were a witness to a crime, these alterations can be dramatic. This was a really big problem in the '80s and '90s.

    Kaitlin Luna: Can you take us back to the early 1990s and you talk about the memory wars, so what was that time like and what was happening?

    Elizabeth Loftus: Oh gee, well in the 1990s and even in maybe the late 80s we began to see an altogether more extreme kind of memory problem. Some patients were going into therapy maybe they had anxiety, or maybe they had an eating disorder, maybe they were depressed, and they would end up with a therapist who said something like well many people I’ve seen with your symptoms were sexually abused as a child. And they would begin these activities that would lead these patients to start to think they remembered years of brutalization that they had allegedly banished into the unconscious until this therapy made them aware of it. And in many instances these people sued their parents or got their former neighbors or doctors or teachers whatever prosecuted based on these claims of repressed memory. So the wars were really about whether people can take years of brutalization, banish it into the unconscious, be completely unaware that these things happen and then reliably recover all this information later, and that was what was so controversial and disputed.

    Kaitlin Luna: And your work essentially refuted that, that it’s not necessarily possible or maybe brought up to light that this isn’t so.

    Elizabeth Loftus: My work actually provided an alternative explanation. Where could these merit reports be coming from if this didn’t happen? So my work showed that you could plant very rich, detailed false memories in the minds of people. It didn’t mean that repressed memories did not exist, and repressed memories could still exist and false memories could still exist. But there really wasn’t any strong credible scientific support for this idea of massive repression, and yet so many families were destroyed by this, what I would say unsupported, claim.

    The idea that ChatBots are not only capable of this, but that they are currently manipulating people into believing they have recovered repressed memories of brutalization is actually at least as terrifying to me as it convincing people that they are holy prophets.

    Edited for clarity

  • _cryptagion [he/him]@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I lost a parent to a spiritual fantasy. She decided my sister wasn’t her child anymore because the christian sky fairy says queer people are evil.

    At least ChatGPT actually exists.