Skip to content

A Prominent OpenAI Investor Appears to Be Suffering a ChatGPT-Related Mental Health Crisis, His Peers Say

Technology
59 35 163
  • isn't this just paranoid schizophrenia? i don't think chatgpt can cause that

    LLMs are obligate yes-men.

    They'll support and reinforce whatever rambling or delusion you talk to them about, and provide “evidence” to support it (made up evidence, of course, but if you're already down the rabbit hole you'll buy it).

    And they'll keep doing that as long as you let them, since they're designed to keep you engaged (and paying).

    They're extremely dangerous for anyone with the slightest addictive, delusional, suggestible, or paranoid tendencies, and should be regulated as such (but won't).

  • Chatbot psychosis literally played itself out in my wonderful sister. She started confiding really dark shit to a openai model and it reinforced her psychosis. Her husband and I had to bring her to a psych ward. Please be safe with AI. Never ask it to think for you, or what you have to do.

    Update: The psychiatrist who looked at her said she had too much weed -_- . I'm really disappointed in the doctor but she had finally slept and sounded more coherent then

    Its so annoying that idk how to make them comprehend its stupid, like I tried to make it interesting for myself but I always end up breaking it or getting annoyed by the bad memory, or just shitty dialouge and ive tried hella ai, I asssume it only works on narcissits or ppl who talk mostly to be heard and hear agreements rather than to converse, the worst type of people get validation from ai not seeieng it for what it is

  • @return2ozma@lemmy.world !technology@lemmy.world

    Should I worry about the fact that I can sort of make sense of what this "Geoff Lewis" person is trying to say?

    Because, to me, it's very clear: they're referring to something that was build (the LLMs) which is segregating people, especially those who don't conform with a dystopian world.

    Isn't what is happening right now in the world? "Dead Internet Theory" was never been so real, online content have being sowing the seed of doubt on whether it's AI-generated or not, users constantly need to prove they're "not a bot" and, even after passing a thousand CAPTCHAs, people can still be mistaken for bots, so they're increasingly required to show their faces and IDs.

    The dystopia was already emerging way before the emergence of GPT, way before OpenAI: it has been a thing since the dawn of time! OpenAI only managed to make it worse: OpenAI "open"ed a gigantic dam, releasing a whole new ocean on Earth, an ocean in which we've becoming used to being drowned ever since.

    Now, something that may sound like a "
    conspiracy theory": what's the real purpose behind LLMs? No, OpenAI, Meta, Google, even DeepSeek and Alibaba (non-Western), they wouldn't simply launch their products, each one of which cost them obscene amounts of money and resources, for free (as in "free beer") to the public, out of a "nice heart". Similarly, capital ventures and govts wouldn't simply give away the obscene amounts of money (many of which are public money from taxpayers) for which there will be no profiteering in the foreseeable future (OpenAI, for example, admitted many times that even charging US$200 their Enterprise Plan isn't enough to cover their costs, yet they continue to offer LLMs for cheap or "free").

    So there's definitely something that isn't being told: the cost behind plugging the whole world into LLMs and other Generative Models. Yes, you read it right: the whole world, not just the online realm, because nowadays, billions of people are potentially dealing with those Markov chain algorithms offline, directly or indirectly: resumes are being filtered by LLMs, worker's performances are being scrutinized by LLMs, purchases are being scrutinized by LLMs, surveillance cameras are being scrutinized by VLMs, entire genomas are being fed to gLMs (sharpening the blades of the double-edged sword of bioengineering and biohacking)...

    Generative Models seem to be omnipresent by now, with omnipresent yet invisible costs. Not exactly fiat money, but there are costs that we are paying, and these costs aren't being told to us, and while we're able to point out some (lack of privacy, personal data being sold and/or stolen), these are just the tip of an iceberg: one that we're already able to see, but we can't fully comprehend its consequences.

    Curious how pondering about this is deemed "delusional", yet it's pretty "normal" to accept an increasingly-dystopian world and refusing to denounce the elephant in the room.

    I think in order to be a good psychiatrist you need to understand what your patient is "babbling" about. But you also need to be able to challenge their understanding and conclusions about the world so they engage with the problem in a healthy manner. Like if the guy is worried how AI is making the internet and world more dead then maybe don't go to the AI to be understood.

  • It’s insane to me that anyone would think these things are reliable for something as important as your own psychology/health.

    Even using them for coding which is the one thing they’re halfway decent at will lead to disastrous code if you don’t already know what you’re doing.

    About the coding thing...

    It can sometimes write boilerplate fairly well. The issue with using it to solve problems is it doesn't know what it's doing. Then you have to read and parse what it outputs and fix it. It's usually faster to just write it yourself.

  • Chatbot psychosis literally played itself out in my wonderful sister. She started confiding really dark shit to a openai model and it reinforced her psychosis. Her husband and I had to bring her to a psych ward. Please be safe with AI. Never ask it to think for you, or what you have to do.

    Update: The psychiatrist who looked at her said she had too much weed -_- . I'm really disappointed in the doctor but she had finally slept and sounded more coherent then

    Update: The psychiatrist who looked at her said she had too much weed -_- . I'm really disappointed in the doctor but she had finally slept and sounded more coherent then

    There might be something to that. Psychosis enhanced by weed is not unheard of. As I’ve read, weed has been shown in studies to bring out schizophrenic symptoms in people predisposed to it. Not that it causes it, just brings it out in some people.

    I say this as someone who loves weed and consumes it frequently. Just like any psychoactive chemical, it’s going to have different effects on different people. We all know alcohol causes psychosis all the fucking time but we just roll with it.

  • Update: The psychiatrist who looked at her said she had too much weed -_- . I'm really disappointed in the doctor but she had finally slept and sounded more coherent then

    There might be something to that. Psychosis enhanced by weed is not unheard of. As I’ve read, weed has been shown in studies to bring out schizophrenic symptoms in people predisposed to it. Not that it causes it, just brings it out in some people.

    I say this as someone who loves weed and consumes it frequently. Just like any psychoactive chemical, it’s going to have different effects on different people. We all know alcohol causes psychosis all the fucking time but we just roll with it.

    Thats what my therapist said

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Dr. Joseph Pierre, a psychiatrist at the University of California, previously told Futurism that this is a recipe for delusion.

    "What I think is so fascinating about this is how willing people are to put their trust in these chatbots in a way that they probably, or arguably, wouldn't with a human being," Pierre said. "There's something about these things — it has this sort of mythology that they're reliable and better than talking to people. And I think that's where part of the danger is: how much faith we put into these machines."

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Dr sbaitao would like to have a word.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    As someone who used to do a lot of mushroom babysitting the recursion talk smells whole lot like someone's first big trip

  • Update: The psychiatrist who looked at her said she had too much weed -_- . I'm really disappointed in the doctor but she had finally slept and sounded more coherent then

    There might be something to that. Psychosis enhanced by weed is not unheard of. As I’ve read, weed has been shown in studies to bring out schizophrenic symptoms in people predisposed to it. Not that it causes it, just brings it out in some people.

    I say this as someone who loves weed and consumes it frequently. Just like any psychoactive chemical, it’s going to have different effects on different people. We all know alcohol causes psychosis all the fucking time but we just roll with it.

    My friend will not touch weed because schizophrenia runs in her family. It could manifest at any time, and weed can certainly cause it to happen.

  • Its so annoying that idk how to make them comprehend its stupid, like I tried to make it interesting for myself but I always end up breaking it or getting annoyed by the bad memory, or just shitty dialouge and ive tried hella ai, I asssume it only works on narcissits or ppl who talk mostly to be heard and hear agreements rather than to converse, the worst type of people get validation from ai not seeieng it for what it is

    It's useful when people don't do stupid shit with it.

  • Could be. I've also seen similar delusions in people with syphilis that went un- or under-treated.

    Where tf are people not treated for syphilis?

  • Where tf are people not treated for syphilis?

    In this case, the United States. When healthcare is expensive and hard to access, not everybody gets it.

    Syphilis symptoms can be so mild they go unnoticed. When you combine that with risky sexual behavior (hook-up culture, anti-condom bias) and lack of testing due to inadequate medical care, you can wind up with untreated syphilis. If you become homeless, care gets even harder to access.

    You get diagnosed at a late stage when treatment is more difficult. They put you on a treatment plan, but followup depends on reliable transportation and the mental effects of the disease have made you paranoid. Now imagine you're also a member of a minority on which medical experiments have historically been done without consent or notice.

    You don't really trust that those pills are for what you've been told at all. So difficulty accessing healthcare, changing clinics as you move around with medical history not always keeping up, distrust of the providers and treatment, and general instability and lack of regular routine all add up to only taking your medication inconsistently.

    Result: under-treated syphilis

  • It's useful when people don't do stupid shit with it.

    When competent ppl don't blindly trust it, can be useful, general public does stupid sht with it

  • Password manager by Amazon

    Technology technology
    150
    2
    535 Stimmen
    150 Beiträge
    200 Aufrufe
    cralex@lemmy.zipC
    My handwriting comes with free encryption at rest. Even I might not be able to read it.
  • Open your mouth, mommy has some delicious things here for you.

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    16 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 440 Stimmen
    104 Beiträge
    671 Aufrufe
    P
    I'm pretty sure I disabled/removed it when I got this phone. I don't specifically remember doing it but when I get a new phone, I watch some YouTube videos on how to purge all the crap I don't want. I read an article that mentioned using command line stuff to eliminate it and it kind looked familiar. I think I did this. I really should write stuff down.
  • 90 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    39 Aufrufe
    B
    What if everyone started talking about how “woke” Apple, Amazon, and Google are? Maybe it would pass, then. Remember, we don’t need to define woke, we just need to point and say the magic word and GOP politicians will vote against it.
  • 68 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    33 Aufrufe
    O
    This is also going to be used against the general populace. Setting up the Techno-Fuedal Surveillance state. The Militaries of the future will be policing their own countries more and more. Very soon the regular police will all have masks and blacked out helmets.
  • 1 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    14 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Fatphobia Is Fueled by AI-Created Images, Study Finds

    Technology technology
    14
    1
    15 Stimmen
    14 Beiträge
    75 Aufrufe
    K
    I pretty much agree. The only thing I would add is that it's not our place to tell others to lose weight or to point out their weight; people already know they are overweight and that it's unhealthy. We shouldn't be policing other people's bodies. It's also possible to be overweight and have body positivity; being overweight doesn't equate to being unattractive.
  • Catbox.moe got screwed 😿

    Technology technology
    40
    55 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    256 Aufrufe
    archrecord@lemm.eeA
    I'll gladly give you a reason. I'm actually happy to articulate my stance on this, considering how much I tend to care about digital rights. Services that host files should not be held responsible for what users upload, unless: The service explicitly caters to illegal content by definition or practice (i.e. the if the website is literally titled uploadyourcsamhere[.]com then it's safe to assume they deliberately want to host illegal content) The service has a very easy mechanism to remove illegal content, either when asked, or through simple monitoring systems, but chooses not to do so (catbox does this, and quite quickly too) Because holding services responsible creates a whole host of negative effects. Here's some examples: Someone starts a CDN and some users upload CSAM. The creator of the CDN goes to jail now. Nobody ever wants to create a CDN because of the legal risk, and thus the only providers of CDNs become shady, expensive, anonymously-run services with no compliance mechanisms. You run a site that hosts images, and someone decides they want to harm you. They upload CSAM, then report the site to law enforcement. You go to jail. Anybody in the future who wants to run an image sharing site must now self-censor to try and not upset any human being that could be willing to harm them via their site. A social media site is hosting the posts and content of users. In order to be compliant and not go to jail, they must engage in extremely strict filtering, otherwise even one mistake could land them in jail. All users of the site are prohibited from posting any NSFW or even suggestive content, (including newsworthy media, such as an image of bodies in a warzone) and any violation leads to an instant ban, because any of those things could lead to a chance of actually illegal content being attached. This isn't just my opinion either. Digital rights organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation have talked at length about similar policies before. To quote them: "When social media platforms adopt heavy-handed moderation policies, the unintended consequences can be hard to predict. For example, Twitter’s policies on sexual material have resulted in posts on sexual health and condoms being taken down. YouTube’s bans on violent content have resulted in journalism on the Syrian war being pulled from the site. It can be tempting to attempt to “fix” certain attitudes and behaviors online by placing increased restrictions on users’ speech, but in practice, web platforms have had more success at silencing innocent people than at making online communities healthier." Now, to address the rest of your comment, since I don't just want to focus on the beginning: I think you have to actively moderate what is uploaded Catbox does, and as previously mentioned, often at a much higher rate than other services, and at a comparable rate to many services that have millions, if not billions of dollars in annual profits that could otherwise be spent on further moderation. there has to be swifter and stricter punishment for those that do upload things that are against TOS and/or illegal. The problem isn't necessarily the speed at which people can be reported and punished, but rather that the internet is fundamentally harder to track people on than real life. It's easy for cops to sit around at a spot they know someone will be physically distributing illegal content at in real life, but digitally, even if you can see the feed of all the information passing through the service, a VPN or Tor connection will anonymize your IP address in a manner that most police departments won't be able to track, and most three-letter agencies will simply have a relatively low success rate with. There's no good solution to this problem of identifying perpetrators, which is why platforms often focus on moderation over legal enforcement actions against users so frequently. It accomplishes the goal of preventing and removing the content without having to, for example, require every single user of the internet to scan an ID (and also magically prevent people from just stealing other people's access tokens and impersonating their ID) I do agree, however, that we should probably provide larger amounts of funding, training, and resources, to divisions who's sole goal is to go after online distribution of various illegal content, primarily that which harms children, because it's certainly still an issue of there being too many reports to go through, even if many of them will still lead to dead ends. I hope that explains why making file hosting services liable for user uploaded content probably isn't the best strategy. I hate to see people with good intentions support ideas that sound good in practice, but in the end just cause more untold harms, and I hope you can understand why I believe this to be the case.