An AI therapist can already easily handle general good mental advice, such as reducing cognitive load, perspective shifts, alternative methodologies, education of standard mental needs, processes and whatever low-level stuff we can benefit from. 2. hooman therapists are a coin-toss. Most are completely crap and build their business from archaic and/or wrong theories and personal ideology/feelings. 3. whatever flaws AI have now, is going away really really fast.
Hooman therapists cost a lot of money, and a shitload of people won't get any help at all without AI.
So, I think it is fine. The potential damage is far less than no help at all. Just use a little common sense and don't take anything as a Gospel - just as when we see hooman therapists.
I think this is true and until we have easily accessible and free mental health services it is the next best option and far more likely to do good than harm.
You simply don't get it, there are shit loads of people who are struggling with their mental health and for various reasons they cannot find and/or afford a therapist. So yes, better to have an AI therapist than no therapist.
I am one of those people lmao and no. it's a false sense of security (or in this case, rather than security, benefits.). it is increasing antisocial behaviors which is already an exponentially rising issue, and even if in the future, ai can be helpful in this context, it's currently not in that place.
Depending on who you are an AI chat might just be a less tedious journal which can obviously be better than not journaling, I still find it sorta weird too but the ridicule is unfounded imo.
From a privacy perspective it's likely terrible/ terrifying but given the majority of people are already transparent for the most part, they are at least taking some real world value for their increased transparency.
I imagine at least some of that ridicule stems from this being kind of the exact wrong answer to the big, societal "why is everyone so lonely now?" question.
It's a bit like watching a pack-a-day smoker buy lozenges for their throat or something, as if you're not supposed to think about the cancer.
This assumes all human therapists are ethical and never make mistakes, and that all of their offices, notes and data syatems are secure too. All security is porous.
The fact that this is considered a viable option because we live in a country with a government that refuses to actually provide for its people, is painfully depressing. AI as your therapist… seriously what the fuck is this timeline? I work in tech and the people constantly blowing AI hot air are not folks you want in charge of the tools for your therapy and wellbeing.
SitD
in reply to grid11 • • •solrize
in reply to grid11 • • •Please go on. I'm not sure I understand you fully.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA
early natural language processing computer program
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)Darkassassin07
in reply to grid11 • • •Sims
in reply to grid11 • • •Not sure..
Hooman therapists cost a lot of money, and a shitload of people won't get any help at all without AI.
So, I think it is fine. The potential damage is far less than no help at all. Just use a little common sense and don't take anything as a Gospel - just as when we see hooman therapists.
Joshi
in reply to Sims • • •zwekihoyy
in reply to Sims • • •filister
in reply to zwekihoyy • • •zwekihoyy
in reply to filister • • •I am one of those people lmao and no. it's a false sense of security (or in this case, rather than security, benefits.). it is increasing antisocial behaviors which is already an exponentially rising issue, and even if in the future, ai can be helpful in this context, it's currently not in that place.
loser behavior through and through
apotheotic (she/her)
in reply to zwekihoyy • • •zwekihoyy
in reply to apotheotic (she/her) • • •Snot Flickerman
in reply to grid11 • • •Tronn4
in reply to grid11 • • •Montreal_Metro
in reply to grid11 • • •kugel7c
in reply to grid11 • • •Depending on who you are an AI chat might just be a less tedious journal which can obviously be better than not journaling, I still find it sorta weird too but the ridicule is unfounded imo.
From a privacy perspective it's likely terrible/ terrifying but given the majority of people are already transparent for the most part, they are at least taking some real world value for their increased transparency.
petrol_sniff_king
in reply to kugel7c • • •I imagine at least some of that ridicule stems from this being kind of the exact wrong answer to the big, societal "why is everyone so lonely now?" question.
It's a bit like watching a pack-a-day smoker buy lozenges for their throat or something, as if you're not supposed to think about the cancer.
flatbield
in reply to grid11 • • •petrol_sniff_king
in reply to flatbield • • •No, it doesn't.
You distrust AI therapists.
You distrust bad therapists.
You do trust good therapists.
See? Works just fine.
flatbield
in reply to petrol_sniff_king • • •petrol_sniff_king
in reply to flatbield • • •I cannot help you. You are having a conversation in your head that no one else here is a part of. You gotta come back down to Earth, man.
orca
in reply to grid11 • • •LiamBox
in reply to grid11 • • •