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

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”.

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.

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.

Is there something about therapists that makes them inherently noble and not prone to the same incentives as everyone else?

The implication was that the low salary selects for people who value helping people more than they value money.

Indeed says that therapists in Toronto, Canada make about CAD $55/hour. That's not FAANG level nor what you'd expect for an MD, but it's not what I'd call low, either.

That said, I certainly don't see therapists as profiteering, in the sense of trying to convince people to pay for therapy they don't need. They might plausibly feel threatened by AI, but they'd absolutely be justified in calling out examples like those in TFA.

$55/hr in Toronto… not to mention the overhead to pay for the building and support staff, the fact that you can’t bill for 40 hours per week, and the mentally demanding nature of the job listening to people’s mental shit all day.

Hot take: Therapists should earn more than most software devs.