Please read about this subject and stop spreading misinformation.

• https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40359-025-02491-9
• https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214782922000021
• https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/14/13/5889
• https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016503272400661X

Their comment is still there, you can read it… ? Their comment is not only wrong, it is dangerous.

Terrible advice. LLM chatbots have very positive results for therapy and while it doesn’t replace a human contact it is far, far better than nothing.

Actually crazy to get upvoted for saying to people in need they should just suck it up.

It totally is dehumanizing, no matter how you turn things. Once someone you disagree with is called an NPC there is no meaning in listening to them or respecting them. You can see in this very comment section people saying that those NPC already “gave up living their life”…

How practical :

• “everyone in this group is stupid”
• “That’s wrong”
• “no but i only mean the stupid ones”

You can read the paper and see for yourself : putting aside the usual weaknesses of such study (low number of participants, very specific situation, etc.), its goal is to see whether AI can replace training in the process of learning a skill. They are comparing students who trained and students who didn’t train a specific skill, it has absolutely nothing to do with the daily use of AI chatbots.

People using this study to spread misinformation is what erodes my patience.

Using AI is way more pro-active than all those examples.

Using AI is not “giving up living one’s own life”…

Ironic.

Ben non, une loi c’est censé avoir un sens, ce genre de gesticulation est néfaste pour tout le monde.

Ils savent plus quoi inventer…

Ah mais oui, j’avais mal compris leur tactique : ils n’ont pas envoyé leur propagande spécifiquement à une boite d’IA pour être utilisé à l’entraînement, ils l’ont “simplement” diffusé publiquement de sorte à ce que n’importe qui qui scrape des données sans faire trop gaffe intègre leurs articles à leur dataset. En fait non seulement les modèles sont autant touchés, qu’ils soient propriétaires ou non, mais les gens sont aussi touché directement puisqu’ils peuvent tomber sur les articles en question.

Raison de plus, s’il y en avait besoin, de passer à des modèles open-sources en local.

Reminds me of this time in english class where we had to role play a situation in which we were an event organiser and the person in charge of security was refusing to let a Sikh artist in because of their ceremonial dagger. Every students thought that the assignment was to convinced the artist to give up their knife our break the contract but the teacher was like “no, it’s not how it works in the UK, it’s supposed to be a dilemma”.