My take: Any research saying that ChatGPT provides more empathetic responses to vulnerable patients is irrelevant as long as the company can not guarantee that a response from ChatGPT won’t encourage self-harm, be racist or in others ways provide advice that hurts a patient.
As it turns out, no such guarantees can be given.
Also, in the study everyone is quoting, the study evaluators were also co-authors. Hmm...
Do read Jenniffer Lycette's reflection on this study, bringing everyone back to reality. Lycette is a rural community hematologist/oncologist and writer in Oregon. Her first novel is “The Algorithm Will See You Now".
https://www.statnews.com/2023/05/04/medical-chatbots-empathy-research-human-doctors/
Tagged: Akkoma
@Beantin
Great storytelling! 😁
@markhurst
@markhurst
Great post. I agree all the way.
@BjornToftMadsen
Very good catch. Thank you! 🙏
@Merovius 😁 Sorry. Bear in mind that this was an example and it is the full impression of the text that I have issues with. But that said, finding other ways to express this can do wonders for your text and finding your own form 😊
These words from Harvard’s writing center bring home the point.
> Avoid phrases like "in conclusion," "to conclude," "in summary," and "to sum up." These phrases can be useful--even welcome--in oral presentations. But readers can see, by the tell-tale compression of the pages, when an essay is about to end. You'll irritate your audience if you belabor the obvious.
Harvard College Writing Center:
https://writingcenter.fas.harvard.edu/pages/ending-essay-conclusions
The Writing Center at George Mason University also addresses this:
https://writingcenter.gmu.edu/articles/7015
@Beantin @brad_frost
Here's when we booked that interview 😁
https://twitter.com/beantin/status/350622986379857921?s=20
Will be in Lisbon next week doing interviews with @Beantin for @uxpodcast at #UXLx.
Just a heads up if anyone here is also there and wants to say hi. 😊
@MaierAmsden
Good counterpoint. While Mark Mason takes a stance about "good" in his article I would assume the underlying theory itself does not account for a value perspective. Whether or not something ruins your experience will always be based on your own context and values.
On the other hand, one way of interpreting the whole argument is that the neo-Nazis are few in number and the reason you are seeing their arguments at all is because of the network effects that bring attention to their relatively small bucket of content. That notion perhaps fails by extension when the nazis are using AI-tools to amplify their messaging.
Your point is valid and I think the the reasoning in the opinion piece may need some additional work. The landscape of trolls and how they are amplified keeps changing.
@christof Awesome! Thanks for sharing.
In Sweden we're in a period of a fair number of squeeze days.
"Squeeze day? What is Per on about now?"
A squeeze day (directly translated from "klämdag") is a day that falls between a public holiday and the weekend.
In many organisations this will then also count as a holiday. But not in all of them. This can in a few cases depend upon union agreements, or on an HR decision. Usually it's local labor agreements that will decide. And they can apply to some squeeze days but not all of them. Yup, it gets confusing quite fast.
So it's not uncommon to be invited to meetings on squeeze days, accept, and then later realise you actually have a day off work. Because we all use digital calendars which certainly don't bring squeeze days to your attention.
In families of course it can be that one person has a squeeze day and another may have to use a vacation day to be off on the same day.
Being self-employed I have to double-check this a lot. Because I can decide based on what clients I have at the moment.
Anyway, Ascension Day tomorrow is always on a Thursday and thus the day after is always a squeeze day.
And another way of expressing that would be: "Yay, it's a long weekend!"
So if you ever hear a swede talk about squeeze days, now you know.
@edendestroyer
Totally. Interestingly we saw this on a huge scale with that open letter on pausing the development of AI. The first source in that letter was to the Stochastic Parrots paper by Timnit Gebru, Emily Bender, Margaret Mitchell et al. The paper concludes the complete opposite of what the letter used it as a support for expressing.
So yes, I would definitely agree that source linking doesn't confirm any support for the claims made in a text, but it does provide me with an opportunity to go deeper and draw my own conclusions. Granted, very few people will unfortunately do that. Many won't even check if the source even exists.
@edendestroyer
His book (The subtle art...) did receive accolades for challenging what a self-help book can be, but some of this older content has certainly been questionable, now that I research him a bit more. It's always good to go into any of these types of readings with a healthy dose of skepticism and source checking. I do appreciate linking to sources, though I'm a bit more wary now that I realise there is no date on the post.
That study though is from 2018: https://snap.stanford.edu/conflict/
When it comes to the overarching message of the content (a small number ruining the experience for many) I tend to agree - and as such I did think it was a good reminder. Would love to hear your impression. These conversations are always more interesting than any source that may trigger them.
Något som det skrivs om väldigt lite men som är ett växande problem med allt billigare AI-verktyg är deepfake-porr. Utseendet på deltagare i en porrfilm kan nu ändras till i princip vem som helst. Det är inte svårt att förstå vem som drabbas mest av den här tekniken.
https://axbom.se/deepfake-porr/
Good reminder of how it's often a small number of people who manage to ruin the wellbeing of many others.
"Data scientists at Stanford recently found that 74% of the conflicts on Reddit were instigated by only 1% of the users. And worse than that, the researchers found that most of these online conflicts were not fought by those who started them. They were fought by the innocent bystanders that got sucked into them."
https://markmanson.net/most-people-are-good
Update: Do note that, as pointed out to me by @BjornToftMadsen, this quote from the article misinterprets the study it is quoting. The study refers to 1% of communities instigating 74% of the conflicts, NOT 1% of users.
https://social.coop/@BjornToftMadsen/110402767455433759
AI will save the world. Yet the glorified chatbot can’t even live up to the most basic accessibility standards. Come on people, it’s a text-based tool and OpenAI still managed to make mess of it! 🤪
https://html5accessibility.com/stuff/2023/05/08/shatgpt/
#accessibility #a11y
I subscribe to a photo/image assets library, and I’m starting to recognise that a lot of hits on searches now are AI-generated images.
This really emphasises how important it is to disclose AI-generation and to allow search filters to exclude these from the results.
@ScotHomestead
Your last sentence resonates with me a lot. I think I've imagined my work life would look a bit different right by now. Been struggling with my self-worth in ways I did not expect over the last 3-4 months. But am slowly landing in the perspective of redefining happiness and appreciating what I have and what I have accomplished.
The idea of my dream (work-wise) pulling me away from other things that are important to me is something I realised I need to keep a better eye on.
Follow your dreams, they say. But what if you can benefit from giving up on your dream?
This article triggered a lot of reflection for me.
https://every.to/no-small-plans/dream-bankruptcy-why-you-should-give-up-on-your-holy-grail
#inspiration
@kashhill So bizarre to see this happening all around. My latest post is about exactly this, misattribution of authors and non-existent books.
https://axbom.com/ux-authors-wonderland/