you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 189 points 1 month ago* (28 children)

Nah, they're not "getting psychosis", AI is revealing their psychosis. We're talking about people used to convincing themselves that infinite growth is possible in a finite world, that fascism is a solution, that they made themselves with no help, that they deserve to be paid hundreds of times more than their most basic employees, that being a billionaire is ethical, etc etc. And we used to accept all that for a contract and a salary. They're breaking the socio-professional contract with AI, now.

CEOs, HRs, the corporate world in general HAVE ALWAYS BEEN 100% PSYCHOTIC. Why do we think capitalism and the workplace are so alienating in the first place? Why do we think they need to invest millions, if not billions, in PR, medias and propaganda? The upper you go, the batshit crazier things get.

  • source
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • [–] 62 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    You've hit the nail on the head with the Infinite Growth statement. Most companies see AI as the next way to cut bottom line costs and hit those annual goals. It's an ouroboros that most companies haven't seen the end of yet. Eventually they'll be left with no talent (arguably the most valuable thing a company can acquire) and uninteresting products nobody is interested in.

    How do you train newbies into useful employees when you let AI handle the easy stuff. Where's your pipeline of promotions so you're developing your next generation of developers? Once the shit starts to hit the fan, you'll see them crumble and ask how we got here. Human talent takes YEARS to cultivate and is extremely hard to buy, especially when competition builds from reducing the supply when people stop going into these fields for lack of entry-level jobs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 1 month ago*

    It's near the bottom but Tarn Adams notes the same thing, that it has been happening far longer than just starting when LLMs became popular.

    "It's been going on forever. That was before AI—or this form of AI," Adams says, before lamenting: "They took the letters from me! I have to talk about dwarf behavior now. I can't even talk about dwarf AI. It doesn't exist. It's dwarf behavior, and they misbehave sometimes."

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    I'm always amazed at people who can't understand that EVERY system is finite.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    We've gotta be almost out of bullshit by now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago

    Well, the amount of bullshit is limited by the number of sources producing it (whether occasionally or frequently, accidentally or intentionally) and their respective capacities. Between human fallibility and the invention of machines to automate bullshit production, I fear that this limit may be much higher than either of us would like.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago (19 children)

    Respectfully: no.

    Psychosis is something that builds over time with many factors and AI is one that can definitely be one of the contributing factors. It can be the one that pushes someone over the edge into psychosis and that may seem as "revealing" it but the psychosis could have been avoided without.

    This line of thinking feels dangerous to me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago (18 children)

    That "build-up" you are talking about, that's called business school followed by entry level management or internship, where modern managers brush over learning their business, in favor of seeking efficiency purely in terms of dollars in/dollars out, in opposition to any other metric.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (16 children)

    Idunno man, sounds like you're trying to shift the blame from AI inducing psychosis in people towards the people affected by it

    (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12712562/)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (13 children)

    Are you suggesting the 'line must go up' mentality only emerged after the advent of AI?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (12 children)

    No.

    I'm mad about the misrepresentation of psychosis

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (9 children)

    a state of distorted reality, marked by disturbances in perception and thought, disorganized behavior, and negative symptoms

    Ticks those boxes

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (8 children)

    Or they're lying for money rather than suffering from a mental condition.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (7 children)

    https://dangoyal.substack.com/p/the-neuroscience-of-greed

    Greed is a symptom of possibly many mental conditions. You're all over the place. All these things you're arguing against are well established ideas, both in common experience and the psychological community.

    You also seem to be using darvo.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (6 children)

    What is darvo?

    Edit: reading the article it seems my way of thinking was indeed a bit simple minded

    Still I would like to argue the point that AI doesn't reveal psychosis, it develops it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

    That's potato/potahto when it comes to mental illness. Without the tendency, it won't develop. AI, because it embodies the potential to replace workers, accelerates the whole process. Making management not just look more psychotic, but become more psychotic, or at least be further down the path.

    Because you can't be horrible to others without feeling bad, no matter who you are. And how well you feel factors intimately into the intensity of mental illness.

    To add more, if they weren't greedy and salivating over giving their workers a shove out the door, they would sanely evaluate what AI brings to the table before upending all their business. They are all obviously unhinged and all the AI did for them was let them act the way they have wanted to basically forever.

    AI might feed their disease, but it was already there, and it didn't hallucinate them into psychosis - they have always been right on the edge.

    The age old story of labor vs. capital.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

    "AI might feed their disease, but it was already there, and it didn’t hallucinate them into psychosis - they have always been right on the edge."

    Is a contradiction. Being on the edge of psychosis is not the same as being in one. Within this part you both claim that AI doesn't hallucinate them into psychosis because they were already on the edge.

    So your argument is "AI doesn't hallucinate people into psychosis it just feeds into it and pushes them over the edge"

    Which is exactly what hallucinating someone into psychosis means.

    Why are you defending AI?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (3 children)

    You are going to ridiculous lengths to be a troll.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)

    Am I?

    Cuz the way it looks to me we're both simply trying to discuss something different.

    Where the point I'm trying to get across is: "If you lay the blame solely on the people getting psychosis then you're actively covering up the harm AI can do" With this in mind: when I read your comments your point is interpreted as: "Psychosis is something that's guaranteed to happen because you're born with it, AI doesn't influence it"

    Whereas the point you're trying to make is probably more in line with "AI didn't suddenly make CEO's greedier, they already were and blaming AI for that rather than capitalism, is bad"

    The problem then lies within the expectation of how discussions on the internet go. By going into the "I need to win" mindset which the internet comments are famous for. Its easy to fall into the mindset of being opponents rather than 2 people trying to convey what they think is important. I believe we both entered this mindset somewhere through the argument.

    Look, I can't know what you find important because you've ignored my questions and instead opted to attack my (sometimes shaky) arguments instead. Which is fair but this doesn't help in opening the conversation to new perspectives. It more or less turns it into a debate instead.

    This time however its clear you've given up on trying to communicate your point. Which is a shame because I was trying to understand it. I even think I'll be able to if you give me context to your thought process similarly as to how I just tried.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    Ah, ok. So for my next question, why is seeking infinite growth not a psychotic delusion?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    You're making the assumption that all "bosses" mentioned in the article are people seeking infinite growth.

    You're making an assumption about a group of people you know nothing about and trying to link them with people suffering from psychosis. Essentially grouping "people suffering from psychosis" together with "greedy CEO's". Whereas greedy CEO's could also simply be narcissistic, evil or simply lying to others to get more money.

    By grouping them with psychosis sufferers you're denying the sufferers their lived experience in favor of assumptions.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    No, like the article said: "it's not as if the current industry problems are unprecedented, or came out of nowhere. Since the advent of modern capitalism (and likely a long while before that), those in charge have often misunderstood, underestimated, or dismissed the hard work that goes into labour they don't understand."

    This and a tendency to abuse workers have always existed. Management isn't the victim here, the AI has just removed the limiter, such as it was.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    Did AI remove the limiter? Or is it actively pushing people towards delusion by agreeing with whats being said and validating the persons delusionary thoughts as how reality works?

  • source
  • parent