Is AI a worse vice than social media?

No one knows for sure, but my guess is no? The difficulty with this conversation of course, lies in the details - specifically in terms of "to what extent can the user, or other presumably positive forces, modify what the person puts in their own brains."

This is why I'm a huge proponent of something like "small AI."

▲

muvlon 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Not per se, but if you're using it as a substitute for human interaction (like most 'chatbot' style UIs want you to), then yes, absolutely.

The main problem is that talking to AI is like talking to a human without any of the thorny parts. It's only going to be nice and helpful and always available to you. Chatting with AI is to social interaction like candy is to a balanced diet. Sure it's more instantly gratifying but long-term it's really bad for you. You need the thorny parts to build important social skills like tactfulness and navigating conflict.

▲

epihelix 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> It's only going to be nice and helpful and always available to you.

You could always try "You are a thorny internet troll" as your system prompt instead. Works wonders.

> social skills like tactfulness and navigating conflict.

We're not still talking about social media, are we?

(I agree that substituting AI for human interaction is bonkers, btw. But I'm not sure social media helps, or doesn't also involve mostly AI interactions these days.)

	▲	muvlon an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Prompting the AI to be mean doesn't do shit. It doesn't change that your interaction with it is always consequence-free. It will never refuse to talk to you, and if it gets too mean you can just nuke it and start an new session. You don't have to build or retain any social skills.

▲

armchairhacker 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

True.

But that’s better than social media, which substitutes human interaction with chronically online weirdos. At least AI is smart and respectful.

	▲	jrm4 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Exactly. Interaction with healthy humans is, of course, better than interacting with AI. But I'd also guess that interacting with AI is better than unhealthy humans, esp those put in front of you by social media.

▲

bemtevi 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes it is because it's the next stage in the emergent phenomenon of tech becoming more addictive so that we can't help but develop it. AI puts technology first over the needs of humans and it's harder to avoid.

▲

armchairhacker 3 hours ago | parent [-]

But where’s the line? You could say the same about the Internet (or movies or books…) It can be used badly, but also to learn and reduce mundane tasks, unlike social media (though you actually can learn from social media, asking the AI is way more effective).

	▲	bemtevi an hour ago \| parent [-]
		There isn't a line, just like 'dangerous speed' isn't a line. The addictive and deleterious effect of a technology is more like a continuous quantity and as that quantity increases, the probability of misuse and deleterious effects increase too.

▲

opan an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes.

▲

verdverm 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Depends, if you care for the bot or develop a para-social relationship with it, then yes, it will be much worse. It does not care or have emotions or understand the human experience. It simulates those things through words and that really messes with the human brain.

If you are using it as an assistant, coach, or deep researcher to chat about interesting things with, then no.

Sherry Turkle breaks it down more here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMiR-GxTrtM