I understand this may be an unpopular take here on HN (it certainly isn't in the real world), but but I can't see these people as anything other than pathetic. Go out, get a hobby, and meet real people. Jesus christ.
To get a hobby takes time. It's not an overnight action. You may dedicate time and find that after a month the hobby you took up isn't yours. If your stuck in a mental mindset this hurts.
Even when you find a hobby to enjoy you then need to dedicate time to build a rapport to those who are already established in that hobby. There is a large outer circle you need to navigate. People will bat eyes at you, may greet you at first but won't form relations.
Why would they waste energy on you when you could disappear in a months time? A hobby takes months of constant effort and mental strain while your being subconsciously judged to make a connection.
Make a wrong joke, say the wrong thing at the wrong time and you can jeopardise the whole effort.
We currently live in a state of defence and that if your mental image doesn't strike the other party the percentage is high that they will be hesitant to make rapport with you.
To those with difficulties such as anxiety, introverted and the likes its even more hard.
Taking upon a hobby to improve yourself is a good way to go but to actually make friends and the likes; easier said then done.
It sucks making friends, I've been attending a new sword fencing club for three months now. I have nothing in common with anyone there, I was acquaintances with one of the fencers and that some how snowballed. Not understanding why, I now have to navigate around them. Which for me is now a mental strain; when all I wish to do is bout and fence. It doesn't always turn out to be.
Well, I have to spend about 7 hours a day inside on a computer, as I'm sure you do too! I have to spend my time doing 'something' while Jenkins does its thing :)
PS. I'd say it's more 'exasperation' at the scenario than annoyance at the words. We could sit here playing reductio ad absurdum all day, but I don't think it's useful to do so.
Judging by the comments this seems like a very popular take. But I really wish we could move from "wow I hate that" to thinking through the right response, because it's likely going to be our children forming these relationships very soon.
These tools aren't for helping people's mental health though, are they. They are becoming attached to fantasy beings and sad when they disappear.
That is the OPPOSITE of healthy, and it's clearly having a dramatically negative effect on their lives.
These aren't tools to help people get better, they are gamed to make it more appealing to the user than the real world. That is damaging to society, and if you want to use my argument (like a few of your siblings have), like I'm saying 'Just get healthy!', go wild, but that's obviously not my argument.
You're coming from an angle that I've never had depression or struggled with anxiety. I actually do know how to conquer these things, and it's done by putting yourself out there into uncomfortable situations and seeing what happens.
Honestly, I think people who have explicitly replaced children with pets are kind of pathetic. I'm not condemning anyone or demanding that others make the choices I have, but I find something very sad about those "I love my grand-dog" bumper stickers. Perhaps those people are perfectly happy, but I can't help but see a huge gap between what a grandchild can provide vs. your child having a dog that you love.
I personally don't, and I think it's because pets make demands of you. Walking a dog, making sure your cat is up to date on vaccines, feeding your fish, etc. These all require some level of sacrifice, which strikes me as inherently un-pathetic.
Which points the way to a new Turing test. Something like: "Can an AI credibly make a demand of the user?"
Of course that would be the best solution. It is just that these are risk-averse and socially shy men who tended to either not go to the school dance or if they did were glued to the walls, not getting picked by any girl and not in possession of enough testicular fortitude to go and ask one because (shock and horror) she might (would) say no and start giggling with her friends about that "weirdo" wanting to dance with her.
Fast forward a decade and there was #MeToo which meant that even glancing at a woman could get them ostracised for being the creeps they already thought they were while those girls from school put up Tinder profiles where they all competed for the top 10% of men - looks like a movie star, makes a zillion $currency_units, might be a bastard who already has a number of girls but that doesn't matter.
These ´AI girlfriends' and 'AI boyfriends' (I guess those exist as well) are just another sign of the way dating and sexuality have been dehumanised, commercialised and in some ways ideologically weaponised.
If this is what the sexual revolution has brought us it is time to rethink the premise of the concepts. In some ways that is already happening - viz. the 'trad wife' phenomenon - but the real solution would be to find a way to retain the good bits from said sexual revolution while getting rid of the parts which led us [1] to where we are now. Something which would appeal not only to those of a more conservative bent, i.e. a way which also appeals to most women [2].
Our future is at stake, quite literally: no relationships means no children means no future. This does not mean that children will not be born any more, it just means that they won't be our children who carry along our traditions and cultures - those traditions and cultures which we claim to value where people are born equal with the same rights, where men and women are equal under the law, where freedom of consciousness, religion and speech are guaranteed to a differing but mostly large extent, where those who happen to be romantically attracted to their own sex do not get thrown off buildings or sentenced to prison or 'converted' or chemically castrated. We fought quite hard to arrive where we were a few decades ago, by no means perfect - perfection is the enemy of good - but certainly better than before and also better than most other places so it does not make sense to throw all those gains to the wind in the name of... what, exactly?
[1] as in 'those parts of the world where the sexual revolution took place and had these detrimental effects'
[2] for just another proof of the fact that men and women are not interchangeable it suffices to look at the difference in political opinions between 'the average man' and 'the average woman'. Yes, there are 'liberal' men. Yes, there are 'conservative' women. That does not negate the fact that women on average lean more towards 'liberalism' while men tend to lean more towards 'conservatism'.
> It is just that these are risk-averse and socially shy men who tended to either not go to the school dance or if they did were glued to the walls, not getting picked by any girl and not in possession of enough testicular fortitude to go and ask one because (shock and horror) she might (would) say no and start giggling with her friends about that "weirdo" wanting to dance with her.
I understand that what I wrote is much (much!) easier to say rather than do, but well... there's only one way to find out :).
> These ´AI girlfriends' and 'AI boyfriends' (I guess those exist as well) are just another sign of the way dating and sexuality have been dehumanised, commercialised and in some ways ideologically weaponised.
Interesting take. I'm lucky that I've been in a great relationship since before hyper internet dating became a thing (tinder, bumble, etc)
> We fought quite hard to arrive where we were a few decades ago, by no means perfect - perfection is the enemy of good - but certainly better than before and also better than most other places so it does not make sense to throw all those gains to the wind in the name of... what, exactly?
Your second footnote doesn't follow at all. I'm sure the star-bellied sneetches would be far more likely to be in favor of a star-belly supremacist platform as compared with the star-less. The right consistently embraces overt sexism to appeal to their religious zealot base, so it should be no surprise that women tend away from them.
This is one of those topics where proponents will not show up in comment because of the stigma.
Realistically there's a whole sector of male society that are not able to find real partners.
Is it really that depressing to you that people would rather talk to their favourite person than some lady shouting about how shoelaces are racist and misogynist?
This is like the debate over welfare and free-riders.
There are some people who need welfare to get by. They cannot provide for themselves. But once a welfare program is created, there will be a different number of people who don't need it but decide to live off it anyway.
AI companions are the same deal. There are definitely people who can't socialize. But once you invent AI companions, some number of people who could learn to socialize never will.
This article is about companion AIs but a similar issue will probably arise around conversational AIs for older and lonely people.
I guess this is a very individual decision, but I can’t see how you can devise someone to just sit lonely in an (maybe not so great) elderly care home who finds comfort in chatting with an AI to “just find other friends”. For some people it’s that or nothing.
doublerabbit|2 years ago
To get a hobby takes time. It's not an overnight action. You may dedicate time and find that after a month the hobby you took up isn't yours. If your stuck in a mental mindset this hurts.
Even when you find a hobby to enjoy you then need to dedicate time to build a rapport to those who are already established in that hobby. There is a large outer circle you need to navigate. People will bat eyes at you, may greet you at first but won't form relations.
Why would they waste energy on you when you could disappear in a months time? A hobby takes months of constant effort and mental strain while your being subconsciously judged to make a connection.
Make a wrong joke, say the wrong thing at the wrong time and you can jeopardise the whole effort.
We currently live in a state of defence and that if your mental image doesn't strike the other party the percentage is high that they will be hesitant to make rapport with you.
To those with difficulties such as anxiety, introverted and the likes its even more hard.
Taking upon a hobby to improve yourself is a good way to go but to actually make friends and the likes; easier said then done.
It sucks making friends, I've been attending a new sword fencing club for three months now. I have nothing in common with anyone there, I was acquaintances with one of the fencers and that some how snowballed. Not understanding why, I now have to navigate around them. Which for me is now a mental strain; when all I wish to do is bout and fence. It doesn't always turn out to be.
vasco|2 years ago
guntherhermann|2 years ago
PS. I'd say it's more 'exasperation' at the scenario than annoyance at the words. We could sit here playing reductio ad absurdum all day, but I don't think it's useful to do so.
mckirk|2 years ago
nathanfig|2 years ago
unknown|2 years ago
[deleted]
catchnear4321|2 years ago
these are all easiest pursued from a starting point of good mental health. so those that may need it the most, may be least likely to be… able.
this is going to be a more unpopular opinion than yours (happy to help) but these flippant responses to “just be healthy” are anything but.
guntherhermann|2 years ago
That is the OPPOSITE of healthy, and it's clearly having a dramatically negative effect on their lives.
These aren't tools to help people get better, they are gamed to make it more appealing to the user than the real world. That is damaging to society, and if you want to use my argument (like a few of your siblings have), like I'm saying 'Just get healthy!', go wild, but that's obviously not my argument.
You're coming from an angle that I've never had depression or struggled with anxiety. I actually do know how to conquer these things, and it's done by putting yourself out there into uncomfortable situations and seeing what happens.
We struggle more in imagination than in reality.
jprete|2 years ago
js8|2 years ago
seti0Cha|2 years ago
ninjha01|2 years ago
Which points the way to a new Turing test. Something like: "Can an AI credibly make a demand of the user?"
unknown|2 years ago
[deleted]
j_crick|2 years ago
the_third_wave|2 years ago
Fast forward a decade and there was #MeToo which meant that even glancing at a woman could get them ostracised for being the creeps they already thought they were while those girls from school put up Tinder profiles where they all competed for the top 10% of men - looks like a movie star, makes a zillion $currency_units, might be a bastard who already has a number of girls but that doesn't matter.
These ´AI girlfriends' and 'AI boyfriends' (I guess those exist as well) are just another sign of the way dating and sexuality have been dehumanised, commercialised and in some ways ideologically weaponised.
If this is what the sexual revolution has brought us it is time to rethink the premise of the concepts. In some ways that is already happening - viz. the 'trad wife' phenomenon - but the real solution would be to find a way to retain the good bits from said sexual revolution while getting rid of the parts which led us [1] to where we are now. Something which would appeal not only to those of a more conservative bent, i.e. a way which also appeals to most women [2].
Our future is at stake, quite literally: no relationships means no children means no future. This does not mean that children will not be born any more, it just means that they won't be our children who carry along our traditions and cultures - those traditions and cultures which we claim to value where people are born equal with the same rights, where men and women are equal under the law, where freedom of consciousness, religion and speech are guaranteed to a differing but mostly large extent, where those who happen to be romantically attracted to their own sex do not get thrown off buildings or sentenced to prison or 'converted' or chemically castrated. We fought quite hard to arrive where we were a few decades ago, by no means perfect - perfection is the enemy of good - but certainly better than before and also better than most other places so it does not make sense to throw all those gains to the wind in the name of... what, exactly?
[1] as in 'those parts of the world where the sexual revolution took place and had these detrimental effects'
[2] for just another proof of the fact that men and women are not interchangeable it suffices to look at the difference in political opinions between 'the average man' and 'the average woman'. Yes, there are 'liberal' men. Yes, there are 'conservative' women. That does not negate the fact that women on average lean more towards 'liberalism' while men tend to lean more towards 'conservatism'.
guntherhermann|2 years ago
I understand that what I wrote is much (much!) easier to say rather than do, but well... there's only one way to find out :).
> These ´AI girlfriends' and 'AI boyfriends' (I guess those exist as well) are just another sign of the way dating and sexuality have been dehumanised, commercialised and in some ways ideologically weaponised.
Interesting take. I'm lucky that I've been in a great relationship since before hyper internet dating became a thing (tinder, bumble, etc)
> We fought quite hard to arrive where we were a few decades ago, by no means perfect - perfection is the enemy of good - but certainly better than before and also better than most other places so it does not make sense to throw all those gains to the wind in the name of... what, exactly?
In the name of shareholder profits :)
OkayPhysicist|2 years ago
gabeaweg|2 years ago
arcanemachiner|2 years ago
[deleted]
hanselot|2 years ago
Is it really that depressing to you that people would rather talk to their favourite person than some lady shouting about how shoelaces are racist and misogynist?
slibhb|2 years ago
There are some people who need welfare to get by. They cannot provide for themselves. But once a welfare program is created, there will be a different number of people who don't need it but decide to live off it anyway.
AI companions are the same deal. There are definitely people who can't socialize. But once you invent AI companions, some number of people who could learn to socialize never will.
MarcusE1W|2 years ago
I guess this is a very individual decision, but I can’t see how you can devise someone to just sit lonely in an (maybe not so great) elderly care home who finds comfort in chatting with an AI to “just find other friends”. For some people it’s that or nothing.
dullcrisp|2 years ago