you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 257 points 2 days ago (49 children)

His wife is going to leave him, and he will have no idea why.

  • source
  • hideshow 49 child comments
  • [–] 153 points 2 days ago (28 children)

    He will ask ChatGPT and it will give him an answer

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • "Your wife left you because you refused to be an active participant in your shared relationship and delegated your parental responsibilities to a glorified plagiarism machine. You're not just a useless partner — you're worthless as a father at best and actively harmful at worst. "

    "No, I don't think that's right. I've convinced myself that AI is the coolest, most useful thing in the world that can only make things better."

    "You're absolutely right! I made the mistake of considering your wife's perspective when your opinion is the only one that matters. As an AI bro, you know better than anyone — the universe revolves around you!"

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 108 points 2 days ago (25 children)

    "Tremendous observation! You were right to try to be better as a father with the help of AI. You did nothing wrong."

    Probably.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 38 points 2 days ago (22 children)

    Having to use AI daily I'm curious if I'm rare in this respect.

    Do other people also hate the fact that the responses are modelled in a way that are basically sucking you off?

    Then when you challenge a response (they lie so goddamn much) they suck you off even more.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (11 children)

    I'm stuck using Copilot for work, and for 3-4 months I began every prompt with 'Do not comment or offer an opinion on my query' and eventually Copilot stopped with the sycophancy.

    Now I'm actively working on deprogramming myself of the notion of speaking to it as a human and making a point to treat it like an old-school MS-DOS ish OS and give it commands instead of being conversational, because it's important to remember that this fucking thing is a computer program.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 2 days ago (4 children)

    Seriously and it will sometimes drop my name like fuck off you are not a person do not refer to me like you are

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 days ago (1 child)

    Interesting. I haven't had that happen.

    But I found that programming it to speak to me manipulatively was demeaning and infantile, though sadly it's proven to be an excellent design decision for mass adoption. For me, personally, it's just important to keep this thing I'm forced to use in context.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago

    This kind of weird profile scanning stuff is why i refuse to use anything other than a local model. It doesnt get to know anything about me other than what i tell it, and that only applies to whatever folder/conversation im currently in

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (2 children)

    Might wanna change that abbreviation there. Unless it was intentional?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 2 days ago (4 children)

    Absolutely. I must use Claude at work. I put instructions in my CLAUDE.MD to, "lay off the sycophantic bullshit. No praise or extraneous details, just deliver answers."

    It doesn't work, per se... But it seems to reduce the attempted fellatio, at least a little.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    I noticed Copilot doing this and I told it to stop that behaviour through the customization prompt. "I don't want platitudes, flattery, or an AI that agrees with me. I need an answer with sources and nothing else." seems to have fixed its worst tendencies for now.

    Now that I am forced to use it for work I at least get output that's usable. The only thing that still irks me is when it attempts to speak from experience ("In my experience...") and when it attempts to humanize itself ("Personally..."). I haven't managed to kill those behaviours yet, but they are getting really annoying.

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

    And I think he wouldn't even care. I mean he's himself actively making an effort to get out of the relationship and replace himself by an AI. At that point it doesn't even matter if he's doing it, she's doing it and whether the replacement is made up of flesh and bones or electricity. He's dispensable.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -9 points 2 days ago (17 children)

    Shit sticks together, what makes you think she would leave?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 day ago (16 children)

    What part of simply asking her husband to be involved with their child made you think she's shit? People change over time. He may have chosen a different trajectory from hers

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 1 day ago (15 children)

    Same part as what makes you guys thing she would. Basically boils down to, we have no idea what they are like!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 day ago (14 children)

    We have one data point: him attempting to shirk his familial responsibility after being asked. It provides some small level of support for the stance you're arguing against.

    It does not support your contrarian response at all.

    So, no. It doesn't boil down to the same thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 1 day ago (13 children)

    It does, if you choose not to understand that, no problem. We have no idea what the next response from the wife could be. "Wow, that's an amazing idea honey!" is just as likely considering she married this man.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 day ago (10 children)

    Reread what I said.

    Understand that you need to INVENT something that isn't part of the evidence to support your position. That is not the same as overeager extrapolation from what IS available.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 1 day ago (9 children)

    Hivemind goes crazy. You fabricated that in the same way I did. There's no telling what the wife reaction would be, so you can infer anything from the tweet.

    Nobody is denying this: him attempting to shirk his familial responsibility after being asked

    The point you are arguing is that his wife would leave him from things like this, which is assuming that his wife would object to his "familial responsibility avoidance", which is the same as assuming she would not object to it. You are inventing the wife having a negative reaction, I am saying the wife could have a positive reaction.

    Also, you invented something first, pot calling the kettle black.

    He may have chosen a different trajectory from hers

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (5 children)

    which is the same as assuming she would not object to it.

    Whenever a law says "a reasonable person," my strategy is to drag them into an infinite fractal of technicalities and possible exceptions because I don't know what reasonable means.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 day ago (4 children)

    Just because you would like one situation to be reality and think that because it is the most reasonable, doesnt mean it is the only possible reality.

    Think of all the famous pieces of shit that exist, they have spouses. Why? Because they are also pieces of shit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 13 hours ago (3 children)

    You need more evidence for that, mate.

    I'm saying she would leave him because I would leave his ass. If she wouldn't, then I feel sorry for her. Truly pitiful.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

    I'm not disagreeing with you about that. Any reasonable person would leave him. All I was saying is that perhaps the wife is not reasonable. How something so simple caused some people to explode, I dont know.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 hours ago (1 child)

    Re-reading the thread, I understand better what you were saying. This is different, though: the AI thing is kind of sudden, in a cultural sense, and it's harder to imagine someone having married a person already knowing they would be into this extremely anti-human parenting style beforehand.

    Like, you're suggesting that a Republican guy probably has a Republican wife, and yeah that's true, but I don't think that it follows that an AI-absentee-father would probably be married to an AI-absentee-mother.

    And that's broadly why people are blowing up at you. Rhetorically speaking, it sounds a bit like you're just being spiteful.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 hours ago

    I'm basically being told I cannot form an opinion based off an assumption while they are doing the exact same thing. It's hypocritical.

    We were not discussing the percent chance of one situation over another, I am just being preached to that only one thing can be true. "I would leave him" isnt evidence that she would.

    I think it makes perfect sense to predict she wouldnt leave him over this, just in the same way she would. We also dont know how long they have been together, or how old their child is. There's so much we dont know and that is all I pointed out. But apparently the echo chamber decided it was that the wife will leave, so any other input was going to be met in this way.

  • source
  • parent