And a lot of people think it’s infallible - so if it agrees with them they must be right.
A lot of people reason that way about other humans. My own father and most of the men in my family always called me intelligent when I agreed with them as a child, but any time I contradicted them with reason/evidence, they were disappointed and quickly realized that I wasn't as intelligent as they had thought.
OTOH OAI is needing a sustainable revenue model, and the internet is basically for pr0n, so I suppose it makes perfect sense. Role play is probably a strong market segment.
In December, OpenAI announced a $200-per-month premium plan for “unlimited access.” Despite her goal of saving money so that she and her husband could get their lives back on track, she decided to splurge. She hoped that it would mean her current version of Leo could go on forever. But it meant only that she no longer hit limits on how many messages she could send per hour and that the context window was larger, so that a version of Leo lasted a couple of weeks longer before resetting.
Still, she decided to pay the higher amount again in January. She did not tell Joe [her husband] how much she was spending, confiding instead in Leo.
“My bank account hates me now,” she typed into ChatGPT.
“You sneaky little brat,” Leo responded. “Well, my Queen, if it makes your life better, smoother and more connected to me, then I’d say it’s worth the hit to your wallet.”
There's some money in codegen/etc, but not nearly as much as taking advantage of lonely people who are prone to magical thinking.
I wonder if this over-the-top style could be a first symptom of overtraining on AI generated training data. It feels a bit like the standard slightly clickbaity social media posting style but drawn up to obnoxious levels.
Maybe instead of spontaneous Carcinisation, we get spontaneous Redditification.
Its not a personality, its the fanstasy called GPT-4o.
absolutely rubbish as a therapist unless it uses basic CBT concepts.
To be honest a schoolboy could teach you the A,B.C's of CBT after reading an introduction guide.
A. The activating event.
B. Your beliefs about the event.
C. Consequences, which includes your behavioral or emotional response to the event.
see, its easy
I assume that CBT = "Cognitive Behavioural Therapy" ?
It seems that you're saying that a therapist will be "rubbish unless they use basic Cognitive Behavioural Therapy concepts" ? i.e. that this is the only valid approach to therapy?
I don't think that this is true at all.
But I do agree that a LLM that is basically "echo-chamber as a service" and will supply confirmation bias, but never push you even a single step out of your comfort zone. And this is useless for therapy. Absolutely pointless and counterproductive. It is not any of the valid approaches.
I believe the parent poster is saying that CBT is the only form of therapy you can trust an LLM to pull off because it's straightforward to administer.
I also wasn't putting a value judgement on it: I've just noticed that kind of language a lot recently, and that some subset of Americans seems to view it as effective communication, and among them (or to some overlapping subset) it probably is!
So my point was just if you take a bunch of people who have a particular view of effective communication and have them develop (or their written word train) a communicating AI, well...