←back to thread

'It cannot provide nuance': UK experts warn AI therapy chatbots are not safe

(www.theguardian.com)
165 points distalx | 9 comments | 10 May 25 15:35 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
caseyy ◴[11 May 25 00:28 UTC] No.43950190[source]▶
I know many pro-LLM people here are very smart, but sometimes it's wise to heed the words of world-renowned experts on a subject.

Otherwise, you may end up defending this and it's really foolish:

> “Seriously, good for you for standing up for yourself and taking control of your own life,” it reportedly responded to a user, who claimed they had stopped taking their medication and had left their family because they were “responsible for the radio signals coming in through the walls”.

replies(4): >>43950334 #>>43950546 #>>43952241 #>>43956082 #
mvdtnz ◴[11 May 25 00:59 UTC] No.43950334[source]▶
As much as I tend to defer to experts, you must also be weary of experts whose very livelihoods are at risk. They may not have your interests at heart.
replies(2): >>43950406 #>>43952558 #
krainboltgreene ◴[11 May 25 01:14 UTC] No.43950406[source]▶
Hell yeah, rail against those profiteering…therapists.

Man I hate this modern shift of “actually anyone who is an expert is also trying to deceive me”. Extremely healthy shit for a civilization.

replies(2): >>43950472 #>>43950501 #
1. ekianjo ◴[11 May 25 01:31 UTC] No.43950501[source]▶
Experts have a direct and obvious inventive to justify their existence. Radio experts warned us about TV. TV experts warned us about the Internet. If you live long enough you see it over and over again
replies(5): >>43950539 #>>43950902 #>>43951514 #>>43951566 #>>43952049 #
2. sweetjuly ◴[11 May 25 01:40 UTC] No.43950539[source]▶
The existence of a similar contradictory example does not disprove the original point. It's okay to be suspicious and cynical, but nuance is still important.

Assuming that anyone who has anything to gain by you believing them is out to get you is rash and leads you only to those who are more willing to lie about their motivations. Yes, doctors and Big Pharma (tm) are financially motivated to sell you cures, but the guy selling you a juice cleanse ""at cost"" for your cancer is still not trustworthy.

replies(1): >>43950926 #
3. kelseyfrog ◴[11 May 25 02:49 UTC] No.43950902[source]▶
It's terrifying that this applies to doctors, teachers, firefighters, and entrepreneurs.
replies(1): >>43950916 #
4. ekianjo ◴[11 May 25 02:51 UTC] No.43950916[source]▶
We were not talking about engineers so thanks for your strawman
replies(1): >>43951470 #
5. ekianjo ◴[11 May 25 02:53 UTC] No.43950926[source]▶
> Yes, doctors and Big Pharma (tm) are financially motivated to sell you cures, but the guy selling you a juice cleanse ""at cost"" for your cancer is still not trustworthy.

Two things can be true at the same time. Don't trust anyone because nobody is transparent about their incentives. Your doctor does not disclose to you that they were at a congress in Hawaii for company X when he prescribes you to use company X drug for your ailment.

6. kelseyfrog ◴[11 May 25 04:47 UTC] No.43951470{3}[source]▶
Maybe we live in different worlds. I see all of those professions justifying their existence. That's exactly why we should distrust them. They have an incentive to do so.
7. musicale ◴[11 May 25 04:54 UTC] No.43951514[source]▶
> TV experts warned us about the Internet

If they warned that it could become a distillation of the worst aspects of television... maybe they weren't wrong.

8. krainboltgreene ◴[11 May 25 05:05 UTC] No.43951566[source]▶
Brother you just described every worker.
9. harvey9 ◴[11 May 25 07:23 UTC] No.43952049[source]▶
This reads like an attempt to restate the buggy whip idiom. It doesn't work well even though your point has some merit.