Thread

1. zasz · 1789740962 · focus · HN ↗

   Honestly the most surprising thing about this is that facts and evidence do work to persuade people.

   1. ccvannorman · 1789741613 · focus · HN ↗

      Yeah the article makes it seem like "just use rationality and facts" is missing a huge part of the equation; I feel like it's common knowledge that this is not the gap in modern convincing. (and don't you dare try to use facts to persuade me otherwise!)

      More likely in my opinion it's the context that matters here. If people know they're trying to be convinced of something and know they're talking to an AI, they may feel like they can trust (what they consider to be) an unbiased and rational AI. There's probably a fallacy associated with the assumption that an AI convincer is more rational and fact based, while it's more probable that the AI in the real world is, in fact, funded and trained by a think tank that wants you to vote against your own self-interests.

      1. hardbass · 1790067886 · focus · HN ↗

         All the major public ai's I have seen seem to be much more neutral than almost any person I have seen. If that is thr bar, then it.is sky high.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.