I see it more as a way technology could be abused rather than an inherent flaw in the technology itself. If you start to replace human interaction with chatbot interaction, that's bad, but there's nothing wrong with using a human-like chatbot in moderation. So many other types of technology are fine in moderation but can be abused in a human-interaction-replacing way: television, social media, video games, etc.

▲

jonstaab 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes, but design nudges use in one direction or another. Or, as McLuhan said, "the medium is the message."

▲

jrflo 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I think the same applies with the examples I listed.

	▲	jonstaab 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The thing is, individual moderation isn't sufficient to combat collective capture. This is Ivan Illich's idea of "radical monopoly", where a technology (like cars or the internet) becomes so entrenched that individuals can't realistically opt out any longer. This happens when we abdicate our collective responsibility to the internal logic and incentives of the tech.