Post #3068953

2026-05-15 22:36 UTC

@mitchellh@hachyderm.io Unfortunately, changing a very convinced person’s view to a different perspective is almost impossible. Not enough things have gone wrong due to AI psychosis for people to augment their perspectives and be open to helpful discussions… yes, databases have been wiped etc., but these examples are (unfortunately) seen as one-offs. I feel like discussing the approach to how to apply AI in the best way can bring perspectives together instead of battling an opposing view.

Replies (2)

@bms48@mastodon.social 2026-05-16 01:09

@pgoultiaev@hachyderm.io @mitchellh@hachyderm.io The updated EU Product Liability Directive 2025 explicitly assigns liability for induced, medically recognised, psychological damage, in the context of "AI" systems. There is a pseudo-religious sociological phenomenon occurring with regards to this technology. Neil Postman warned about this in "Technopoly". Ivan Illich proposed social strategies for actually dealing with and preventing it...

Open ##3068954
@bearbob@hachyderm.io 2026-05-16 14:21

@pgoultiaev@hachyderm.io @mitchellh@hachyderm.io the issue with these „one-off“ failure cases is lack of empathy. They are seen as stupid mistakes by stupid people. I am smart, surely this won’t happen to me. So I don’t need to take any learnings from there, especially not questioning if this has any implications for the road I am travelling.

Open ##3068955