[bheadmaster]

> This is the best feature of ChatGPT for me, and the reason I pay for it.

While I completely understand this sentiment, I would be wary of Service as a Software Substitute being your alternative to human contact. If we start feeling (something akin to) genuine human connection to a service, the company providing the service has a large amount leverage over us. The scene from Blade Runner 2049 comes to mind. Additionally, the emotional connection might make us an order of magnitude more vulnerable to brainwashing and psyops.

[TeMPOraL]

Let's be more precise by what we mean by "human interactions" / "human contact" here. For example:

- An alternative outlet for venting/intimate conversations than your friends/spouse? I can see a problem growing here.

- A replacement/substitute for a therapist? I doubt even GPT-4 can do that job better than actual therapist (especially when face to face, not over Zoom), but there are many scenarios where ChatGPT would still be useful - perhaps one can't afford therapy, or otherwise doesn't have access to it, or one feels their issues don't warrant a proper therapy just yet.

- Related to the above, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy is one technique known to be somewhat effective when done alone with a book (relative to the effectiveness of individual/group therapy). I can imagine ChatGPT making this kind of self-help easier, and more effective. I know there have been attempts to make CBT chatbots some years ago (obviously prior to "GPT revolution"), but I don't know how effective they turned out to be.

- An alternative to posting questions on forums, group chats, or asking random people? IDK. maybe let's split it:

-- Individuals you know, directly or via group chat, and small communities - conversations there are simultaneously transactional/object-level and create interpersonal bonds. Replacing that with ChatGPT could make one worse off. However, some people (myself included) already have difficulty with this kind of interaction, so ChatGPT here is strictly positive (both in delivering answers and helping form a habit of phrasing questions/requests instead of doing Google searches).

-- Mass audience forums - Reddit, HN, Facebook comments, StackOverflow, etc. - the community might lose out a bit on reduced participation, but individually, I feel if ChatGPT can give you a satisfying answer to your question, you should use it, and relevant forums you frequent are likely better off with you not posting that question.

Etc.

[yakubin]

> - A replacement/substitute for a therapist? I doubt even GPT-4 can do that job better than actual therapist

Maybe if you qualify that with “unusually good” therapist. IME even Eliza in Emacs is better than most therapists. ChatGPT surely leaves them in the dust.

[TeMPOraL]

> Maybe if you qualify that with “unusually good” therapist.

Not "unusually good", but a working match, sure. A thing not enough people realize is that therapy is like dating. Not every therapist is going to be a "good match" for you, so if things don't seem to click for some reason, just thank them and go look for another one.

> IME even Eliza in Emacs is better than most therapists. ChatGPT surely leaves them in the dust.

If limited to textual channel, maybe. But a real therapy will have at least the visual channel (if on Zoom), or full presence (if in person) - there's a lot of information relevant to therapy that gets communicated this way. Tone, cadence, uncontrolled reactions, body language, etc. That alone gives even a mediocre therapist a leg up in this comparison.

[cmilton]

>However, some people (myself included) already have difficulty with this kind of interaction, so ChatGPT here is strictly positive

Do you think this technology is going to make it more difficult for people like yourself?

[TeMPOraL]

People like me have an issue asking people questions specifically because people-related reasons. LLMs aren't people (yet), so those reasons don't apply. So in this context, the technology is making things easier for us.

[cmilton]

Thank you. I wholeheartedly agree that it can make things easier. Easy in the short term may not be beneficial in the long would be my only concern.

[surgical_fire]

> If we start feeling (something akin to) genuine human connection to a service

I don't. I see it as a tool, and I treat it as a tool. I don't have with it any more of a human connection than I have with IntelliJ where I type my code or the Linux Mint where it runs. Meaning - I like the tool, but that's about it.

On the other hand, I also don't have any genuine human connection with the random humans I happened to interact on the internet. In a sense, they are just text on a screen, and could be bots for all I care.