267
Doctors Say AI Use Is Almost Certainly Linked to Developing Psychosis (futurism.com)
submitted 10 months ago by to c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world
22 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 26 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 55 points 10 months ago

Who knew that "simulating" human conversations based on extruded text strings that have no basis in grounded reality or fact could send people into spirals of delusion?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 54 points 10 months ago

    Talking to a hallucination is, in fact, not good for you.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [+] 33 points 10 months ago (1 child)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 24 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    One recent peer-reviewed case study focused on a 26-year-old woman who was hospitalized twice after she believed ChatGPT was allowing her to talk with her dead brother

    I feel like the bar for the turing test is lower than ever... You can't tell ChatGPT apart from your own relatives??

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    My cousin lost her young daughter a few years back. At Christmas, she had used AI to put her daughter in her Christmas photo. I didn't have words, because it made her so happy, and I can't fathom her grief, but man. Felt pretty fucked.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 10 months ago

    I feel you. I can't deny the comfort it brought her, but I also can't help but feel like it is training her to reject her grief.

    Not that I'm in any position to pass judgement. I just hope it doesn't lead to anything more severe.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 20 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    So the developing psychosis could be causing the AI use?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 27 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    That's what the article says, yes:

    “The technology might not introduce the delusion, but the person tells the computer it’s their reality and the computer accepts it as truth and reflects it back, so it’s complicit in cycling that delusion,” Sakata told the WSJ.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago

    Thing that tells you exactly what you want to hear causes delusions?

    Whaaat?

    I completely understand why articles like this need to exist. Information about what 'AI' actually is needs to be spread. That being said, I also can't remove myself from the impression that this is just incredibly obvious. Like one of those studies about whether a dog actually loves their owner by going to lengths such as an MRI of their brain while looking at their owner.

    Like, thank you mystery researcher on the internet — but you could have saved the helium by just sticking to Occam's Razor.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [+] 32 points 10 months ago (4 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
    • [+] -21 points 10 months ago (7 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    You increase the sample size, you increase the number of hits.

    Do you think statisticians aren't well aware of this?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -10 points 10 months ago (2 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    If the statisticians involved in this case study are anywhere close to as unhinged as you are then it's no wonder they got those results lol

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago

    Homie been smokin’ them data science rocks, it seems.

    Literally made an account on this instance just to let them know I think they’re fucking dense, but I decided they’re not even worth interacting with personally.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    Huh? The whole point of this emerging scientific debate is that AI use might be proportionally unsafe, i. e. it might be a risk factor causing and/or exacerbating psychosis. Now sure this is still just a hypothesis and it's too early to make definite epidemiological statements, but it's just as wrong to blankly state that AI is "still just as safe".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [+] -18 points 10 months ago (3 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Alright, but the point is that the "X level of safety" AI is at might be a dangerous level in the first place. I don't think anybody is arguing that AI got more dangerous as a psychosis risk factor over the past year or so, they're arguing that AI was a risk factor to begin with, and with increased AI use more evidence of this turns up. So you saying that the inherent risk of AI hasn't changed is kind of a moot point because that's not what the debate is about.

    Also notice that I clearly said it's too early to tell one way or the other, so there's no reason to malign me as uncritical.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [+] -10 points 10 months ago (1 child)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 9 points 10 months ago

    I can agree with that. (As an aside, I think scientific findings are almost always exaggerated like this in popular journalism.)

    I'd say the long and short of it is that we simply don't (and can't) know yet. But I think more research on possible links between AI and psychotic delusions is definitely useful, because I find the idea of a connection plausible.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
    • load more comments (-1 replies)