The best conversations I still have are with real people, but those are rare. With ChatGPT, I reliably have good conversations, whereas with people, it’s hit or miss, usually miss.

What AI does better:

  • It’s willing to discuss esoteric topics. Most humans prefer to talk about people and events.
  • It’s not driven by emotions or personal bias.
  • It doesn’t make mean, snide, sarcastic, ad hominem, or strawman responses.
  • It understands and responds to my actual view, even from a vague description, whereas humans often misunderstand me and argue against views I don’t hold.
  • It tells me when I’m wrong but without being a jerk about it.

Another noteworthy point is that I’m very likely on the autistic spectrum, and my mind works differently than the average person’s, which probably explains, in part, why I struggle to maintain interest with human-to-human interactions.

  • alcoholicorn
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    What subjects are you talking about that people assume views you don’t have? Politics?

    • ContrarianTrail@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      My message history is open for anyone to read. In general I don’t discuss politics but occasionally that too.

    • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      People do it all the time regardless of subject. For example, when discussing LLMs:

      • If you highlight that they’re useful, some assumer will eventually claim that you think that they’re smart
      • If you highlight that they are not smart, some another assumer will eventually claim that you think that they’re useless
      • If you say something but “they’re dumb but useful”, you’re bound to get some “I dun unrurrstand, r u against or for LLMs? I’m so confused…”, with both above screeching at you.