I did dig into that after I read it. Even more depressing honestly. He should know better than to throw around labels.

Sorry but the pro-AI/AI boosters do the exact same thing when they say that people who don't use AI are "Luddites" and the like. And I'm pretty sure the Luddite thing has been going on for far longer than the AI psychosis labeling.

	▲	altcognito 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Also a luddite is not thought of as a danger to others. The label of psychosis implies otherwise. Luddite extends beyond AI Whataboutism is a plague. That said, calling folks luddites is an annoyance.

▲

beepbooptheory 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Is it that psychiatrists in general could maybe use this label, but you know this one is doing it wrong? Otherwise, who is allowed to use the term?

Doesn't it kinda inspire you at least a little to reflect on your understanding of the particular term? Or should we understand that to be faultless here?

In general, the definition we need to have here is that psychosis is always extreme and violent and pretty much matching the cultural trope we have for it? And anything less is incorrect usage? Is that why you disagree in explicit terms?

▲

altcognito 8 hours ago | parent [-]

> Is it that psychiatrists in general could maybe use this label, but you know this one is doing it wrong? Otherwise, who is allowed to use the term?

I specifically take issue with the weak standard used.

> Doesn't it kinda inspire you at least a little to reflect on your understanding of the particular term? Or should we understand that to be faultless here?

Is there a way to read this that isn't insulting? Do I need to reflect on my understanding until it matches yours?

> In general, the definition we need to have here is that psychosis is always extreme and violent and pretty much matching the cultural trope we have for it? And anything less is incorrect usage? Is that why you disagree in explicit terms?

Never said any of that. It's a medical term and carries weight. Core symptoms are hallucinations and delusions. Here, delusions is not "my corporate product is better than your corporate product", it is not a strongly held belief that isn't real. We don't call belief in God psychosis. (some do, but that's beside the point)

	▲	beepbooptheory 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Hey so sorry to insult! Cards on the table, I was certainly called to reflect on my assumptions about the term and its use when I read the article, but I can certainly see how that comment would feel ludicrous/offensive to someone so knowledgeable. Thanks here for the lesson. Just so I don't get in trouble in the future: is it correct or incorrect to assume psychosis is necessarily accompanied by violence? I only ask because you response to the sibling comment seems to contradict your response to me? But, as you can probably tell, I am not working with much brainpower over here, so I am sure I am just misunderstanding!