Thread

1. ForHackernews · 1790506674 · focus · HN ↗

   In my view, these models should never be set up to output first-person "experiential" (from the abstract) language. It's too easy to humans to anthropomorphize software that presents itself as having an identity.

   The AI companies have chosen to package LLMs as friendly chatbots because they know that will be engaging for humans, but it's manipulative dark pattern. An honest LLM interface would sound like the computer off Star Trek.

   1. broken-kebab · 1790508586 · focus · HN ↗

      It's an interesting thought, but humans do like to antropomorphize things anyway, and I believe your variant won't be popular if choice is given to consumers.

      1. ForHackernews · 1790513470 · focus · HN ↗

         Consumers choose cigarettes, too. Especially in aggregate, humans are fallible creatures prone to vices, and our regulations should recognize that an discourage dark patterns in UX.

         1. broken-kebab · 1790613339 · focus · HN ↗

            For this argument to stand it needs at least two legs:

            - general consensus about societal harms from something,

            - belief that cost of regulation of something is lower than alleged harm.

            And so far, I can't see either.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.