Not advocating pro/con here, but wouldn’t people with mental problems (actual, emerging, latent) be the people using AI in a “hooked on AI” manner way more than normal people?
Yeah, I am quite firmly against “AI” as is being pushed on the consumer by the big corporations and OpenAI and so on, but these headlines tend to annoy me. I agree with you there.
Every time something new comes out, there is a similar moral panic going on, and it’s rarely, if ever, justified (rock and roll makes you a satanist, video games make you violent and so on).
If anything, I think it detracts from a bunch of other very valid points one can argue against the current generative AI, and makes the people who are reticent or opposed to it look a lot less credible when associated with this.
That being said, as time passes and more and more serious studies about it come out, maybe a scientific consensus will emerge and will agree with this, in which case I’ll be happy to eat crow and add this to my long list of reasons why I don’t like these technologies. Until then, I’ll remain somewhat skeptical of those claims.
I think the article does a good job in explaining what correlation is (later on). Somehow these two things are linked. It’d be intriguing to hypothesize this is why it’s like that. And I think it would make a lot of sense. It’s just that there is no solid evidence (yet) to draw a conclusion. Could be like that. Could also be an example where something seems obvious, but it’s not. So… I think this is a very good point. And likely a good working hypothesis (Edit: or null hypothesis) for future research.
If you have absolutely no proof it’s a terrible idea. Sure go ahead and search but if you come up empty handed that means it wasn’t correct and that’s that.
Not advocating pro/con here, but wouldn’t people with mental problems (actual, emerging, latent) be the people using AI in a “hooked on AI” manner way more than normal people?
Yeah, I am quite firmly against “AI” as is being pushed on the consumer by the big corporations and OpenAI and so on, but these headlines tend to annoy me. I agree with you there.
Every time something new comes out, there is a similar moral panic going on, and it’s rarely, if ever, justified (rock and roll makes you a satanist, video games make you violent and so on).
If anything, I think it detracts from a bunch of other very valid points one can argue against the current generative AI, and makes the people who are reticent or opposed to it look a lot less credible when associated with this.
That being said, as time passes and more and more serious studies about it come out, maybe a scientific consensus will emerge and will agree with this, in which case I’ll be happy to eat crow and add this to my long list of reasons why I don’t like these technologies. Until then, I’ll remain somewhat skeptical of those claims.
I think the article does a good job in explaining what correlation is (later on). Somehow these two things are linked. It’d be intriguing to hypothesize this is why it’s like that. And I think it would make a lot of sense. It’s just that there is no solid evidence (yet) to draw a conclusion. Could be like that. Could also be an example where something seems obvious, but it’s not. So… I think this is a very good point. And likely a good working hypothesis (Edit: or null hypothesis) for future research.
If you have absolutely no proof it’s a terrible idea. Sure go ahead and search but if you come up empty handed that means it wasn’t correct and that’s that.