Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Further comment (Score 4, Insightful) 110

To add to the parent post, the paper appears to be the first step in the scientific method: "Notice a trend".

The next steps will be "form a hypothesis", "construct a test to confirm or deny the hypothesis", "perform the test"... and so on.

In this specific case, "perform the test" might be impossible to do for ethical reasons - you can't take people at random and sit them down in front of a LLM and test their level of psychosis before and after, because of that pesky "do no harm" rule.

But we might be able to find people who have had their psychosis levels measured before LLMs became available, and whose LLM accounts will accurately show how much LLM usage they have, and we can then remeasure their levels of psychosis and see if this correlates with LLM account usage.

Or some other test like that.

The paper appears to be an attempt to raise the issue and start a conversation. From the abstract:

[...] but there is a growing concern that these agents could reinforce epistemic instability and blur reality boundaries. In this Personal View, we outline the emerging risks, possible mechanisms of delusion co-creation, and safeguarding strategies for agential AI for people with psychotic disorders. We propose a framework of AI-informed care, involving personalised instruction protocols, reflective check-ins, digital advance statements, and escalation safeguards to support epistemic security in vulnerable users.

From the parent post:

One thing I can tell you, my mother was heavily affected by television.

I'm also heavily influenced by TV, and have spent a lot of time trying to sort out beliefs that come from TV from beliefs that come from experience or research.

I'm constantly presented with a situation or belief and have to pause to reflect and say "I believe that because it was on TV, it's probably not real". Many of my opinions on the police, government agencies, other countries, world events, and social constructs come not from experience, but on how they were portrayed on TV.

We're hard-wired to believe what people tell us, it's a cognitive shortcut in an environment where you can't know anything, but lots and lots of what we think today are only dramatic choices intended to provoke emotional response. (Compare with news reporting today. On both sides.)

For example, I've met people who won't go hiking because of all the bugs, skunks, poison ivy, and bears.

Assuming that LLMs are content neutral, I think in 10 years or so we're going to find people whose worldview is a greatly amplified version of random events that were highlighted when they were kids.

Comment Anonymity (Score 1) 54

Lying to yourself is the biggest danger for trying to stay Anonymous. With enough patterns to recognize, the idea that one can hide is a delusional take.

The only way to win, is to run EVERYTHING you post through an AI that changes the tone and words used in all your online activity. But even then that may itself be a lie.

Comment OpenAI needs a new hail mary (Score 4, Interesting) 93

What about Altman making "Open" AI closed-source and for-profit years ago didn't tell you he was a dirty, money-grubbing cunt ?

Bring on the bankruptcy !

LLAMA was [illegally] released into the public three years ago (to the day - March 3, 2023), and it's estimated that ten years of AI improvements happened in the subsequent 6 months. People were doing all sorts of things with LLMs that meta hadn't thought of, or didn't have time to develop. Such as text-to-audio, local LLM use, and automated manuscript generation.

All these attempts at monetizing the LLMs are, at the same time, holding back the progress of AI development. If OpenAI wants to leap ahead of the competition, they should put their language model online and see what the community comes up with.

I get it - training a LLM takes roughly $100 million for the initial dataset, and companies need to recoup this expense.

Still, I'm saddened that I can only use the system for purposes that the company approves of, and in ways that they have already thought of.

There's a lot of potential there, and we're not making good use of that.

Comment Re:Why do they do this? (Score 1) 13

I read that and was simultaneously laughing and angry. I'd call it a load of horseshit, but that would be insulting to horseshit.

What a bunch of windbaggery. Meaningless, feckless corporate speak.

We know. They know we know. We know they know we know. They don't care.

Nothing says "fuck you" like a "well worded" press release. It was only missing the AI EM-DASH.

Comment Plus peace of mind (Score 1) 33

What you describe is exactly how Visa, Mastercard, AMEX and the like operate... literally taking money for doing nothing beyond being a middle man. Yep, they take a cut of every transaction that goes over their networks and they've been working diligently to make sure every single transaction goes over their network.
[Emphasis mine]

You are not telling the whole story here.

I'm currently in the middle of a $15,000 purchase dispute with a Chinese vendor (for a CNC system). The device arrived non-functional, the merchant's customer service is wildly non-useful and time consuming, and after 3 months of dikking around I've decided to send it back.

I have clear E-mail evidence from the merchant acknowledging the problem, the CC company yanked back the payment and is forcing the merchant to issue an RMA for the device.

The credit card company isn't on my side, nor are they on the side of the merchant - they are on the side of honest transactions, and they police those transactions for me.

Twice I've had my CC info stolen at a restaurant(*), the CC company detected fradulent purchases, and issued me a new card. A couple of times they incorrectly detected fraud, and a quick phone call sorted that out.

All of this is value added to using a credit card.

It's not *just* rent seeking on transactions, it's also providing a service: "peace of mind" in your purchases.

If anyone is interested, ask ChatGPT about the Fair Credit Reporting Act as regards to dispute resolution. If you receive a defective product, you have 60 days from the statement (not the purchase, but the statement) to initiate a dispute, and there are several "states" the dispute can be in, such as "vendor is working with the customer to resolve the issue".

It's not just rent seeking, the extra 5% CC fee for the purchase is for "peace of mind".

(*) Don't let the CC out of your sight. If the waitress takes the CC away from your table, she can easily write down the number and security code before bringing it back.

Comment Social changes (Score 3, Interesting) 62

I was surprised to discover that you can purchase a 30TB hard drive for about half a grand.

That's 30,000 gigabytes, or about 30,000 hours of recorded video. How much of a person's life could be recorded on this?

There's about 8800 hours in a year, but you're asleep for 1/3 of that so call it 6000 hours. You can get 5 years of continuous video of your life on a device the size of a paperback book. If you can compress the video of your mundane activities, such as driving to/from work or waiting in line, only record single frames every second during these times, or do lower resolution during those times with key frames at higher resolution, you might get away with 4,000 hours of continuous video in a year. Probably less.

So this new disk could conceivable make a continuous record of 30 years of someones' life - all the interactions, all the people, all the information you see, all the places you've been.

(And probably more, probably more like 50 years. And if cloud storage is easily available everywhere, you wouldn't even need the appliance on you.)

This will inevitably lead to some interesting social changes.

For example, 50 Years of video using an AI assistant to search through and answer your questions (have I met that person before?) would be quite useful.

Also, the AI could train itself on your video and behaviour. The AI could then simulate you once you're gone.

Lots of possibilities here...

Comment Re:It won't stand if passed. (Score 1) 123

Let me add to this, I've never seen in the whole world any law as stupid as USA's holy Second Amendment. Yes, maybe it made sense for a period between 1774 and 1800, but after that... it's just keeping your beloved homeland anchored to a period long gone, with consequences in its culture (how come it is normal and customary to own a gun, FFS) and in the danger to its society.

Slashdot Top Deals

Money cannot buy love, nor even friendship.

Working...