this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2024
521 points (98.2% liked)

Facepalm

2598 readers
6 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

ChatGPT can't remember its own name or who made it, any attempt by ChatGPT to deconstruct an argument just results in a jumbled amalgam of argument deconstructions, fuck off with such a fake post.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago (2 children)

definitely NOT the asshole.

chat GPT sells all the data it has to advertising companies. She's divulging intimate details of your relationship to thousands upon thousands of different ad companies which also undoubtably gets scooped up by the surveillance state too.

I doubt she's using a VPN to access it, which means your internet provider is collecting that data too and it also means that the AI she's talking to knows exactly where she is and by now it probably know who she is too

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Your ISP won't get any of that data.
Almost every website uses SSL/TLS now, so your ISP will only see what time and how much data was transmitted between you and chatgpt.
It's enough info for a government agency to figure out who you are if they wanted to, but your ISP won't have any idea what you're saying.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 hours ago

they can still see all your DNS requests

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

I'd hope so.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 2 days ago

She's training herself on AI generated output. We already know what happens when AI trains on AI

[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'm a programmer, I've already argued with chatgot more than any woman.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago (2 children)

You are not married, I can tell.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

the secret to a long marriage is two things.

  1. communication is key
  2. sometimes it's better to keep your dumb mouth shut.
[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 days ago

Also treat it as permanent, like it was intended to be. Lots of people nowadays don't treat "till death do us part" seriously.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago

I haven’t seen the Tunak Tunak Tun (Dahler Mehdni) guy in forever!

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 days ago

NTA but I think it's worth trying to steel-man (or steel-woman) her point.

I can imagine that part of the motivation is to try and use ChatGPT to actually learn from the previous interaction. Let's leave the LLM out of the equation for a moment: Imagine that after an argument, your partner would go and do lots of research, one or more of things like:

  • read several books focusing on social interactions (non-fiction or fiction or even other forms of art),
  • talk in-depth to several experienced therapist and/or psychology researchers and neuroscientists (with varying viewpoints),
  • perform several scientific studies on various details of interactions, including relevant physiological factors, Then after doing this ungodly amount of research, she would go back and present her findings back to you, in hopes that you will both learn from this.

Obviously no one can actually do that, but some people might -- for good reason of curiosity and self-improvement -- feel motivated to do that. So one could think of the OP's partner's behavior like a replacement of that research.

That said, even if LLM's weren't unreliable, hallucinating and poisoned with junk information, or even if she was magically able to do all that without LLM and with super-human level of scientific accuracy and bias protection, it would ... still be a bad move. She would still be the asshole, because OP was not involved in all that research. OP had no say in the process of formulating the problem, let alone in the process of discovering the "answer".

Even from the most nerdy, "hyper-rational" standpoint: The research would be still an ivory tower research, and assuming that it is applicable in the real world like that is arrogant: it fails to admit the limitations of the researcher.

load more comments
view more: next ›