FishFace

It's unlikely humans will die out even in the most extreme climate change scenarios. We'll just be in a much deteriorated state at the poles.

There is an opportunity (or there would be, if these companies were in sane jurisdictions) to try and apply some standards, because only a handful of companies are capable of hosting these bots.

However, there are limitations because of the inherent nature of what they are. Namely, they are relatively cheap, so you can host a number of conversations with them that it is completely unmanageable to manually monitor, and they are relatively unpredictable, so the best-written safety rails will have problems (both false positives and false negatives).

Put together, that means you can't have AI chatbots which don't sometimes both: spout shit they really should not be doing, such as encouraging suicide or reinforcing negative thoughts; and erroneously block people because the system to try and avoid that triggered falsely. And the less of one you try to have, the more of the other.

That implies, to me, that AI chatbots need to be monitored for harm so that those systems can be tuned - or if need be so that the whole idea can be abandoned. But that also means that the benefits of the system need to be analysed, because it's no good going "ChatGPT is implicated in 100 suicides - it must be turned off" if we have no data on how many suicides it may have helped prevent. As a stochastic process that mimics conversation, there will surely be cases of both.

That seems to be an unresolved lawsuit, not knowledge.

If we are to look at the influence ChatGPT has on suicide we should also be trying to evaluate how many people it allowed to voice their problems in a respectful, anonymous space with some safeguards and how many of those were potentially saved from suicide.

It's a situation where it's easy to look at a victim of suicide who talked about it on ChatGPT and say that spurred them on. It's incredibly hard to look at someone who talked about suicide with ChatGPT, didn't kill themselves and say whether it helped them or not.

They'd better fucking have data on this because it is horrendously irresponsible to let people talk to bots that imitate real conversations not track whether your bots are encouraging depressed people to kill themselves.

My terminal with a comfortably large font, full screen at 1080p, has 238 columns. That should be enough to split screen 2x120 column editors for all but the very longest lines, and you have even more room if you reduce the font size a point or have a 1440p monitor.

What about their drinks, huh??

Why do you not think the other links are setting their prices in this way?

I would've been put off had I been a fan of the original, but I had never seen it. To be honest from what I hear, the original was so cheesy that there'd be a lot to be annoyed by with the remake, but we got something excellent.

You think people are only suggesting it in cases where it's appropriate?

Understand that things aren't perfect, and complaining is cathartic. You don't need to fix everything that people complain about - if someone complains about their car, do you need a "solution"? I complain about my cat's annoying behaviours all the time, but there's no acceptable way to fix them.

It's not a solution for most people.

Well people say it does. Of course it's trivial to adapt such algorithms to include misspellings