Yes, I don’t get why so many of you appear to not understand that these problems coexist with the reality that people have been using it anyway. As I alluded to above when I said that a psychotherapist would be required to actually learn to practice those strategies and expressed my disagreement with AI therapists on a treatment basis in multiple instances, there is no replacing a human therapist or any reasonable basis to even call AI therapists “therapists.”

As I said, again multiple times, since people use it anyway and prefer it to nothing or a bad therapist, we have to take its merits seriously and identify why. Reality does not care that you find it dumb and icky, I would love it if everything I know is dumb and icky was simply not a problem because I found it dumb and icky.

All of these people are clearly not just stupid, which is what you and the person I responded to seem to think, which is just foolish. No, everyone else is not just dumber than you. There is clearly a material reason why people use these things and why some even say they want to. How many people do you know who do not go to therapy because they can’t afford it, or because they’ve been traumatized by it, or because they could get fucking institutionalized for it. Have you thought about, perhaps, the people as people?

I swear to god, some of you see a long comment from someone you don’t like the sound of and you just make up whatever it says based on the shit you imagine people who disagree with you say. And they say reading levels are down, pshaw.

Well, I’m sure someone who uses “clanker” wouldn’t need therapy anyway.

Seriously though, I doubt the health implications or claims about the efficacy of AI therapists, but we can’t just ignore the fact that there are people who use it, which means there’s something about it that makes it accessible or preferable to a human therapist.

If you’ve ever had to get a psychotherapist, you know that it is prohibitively expensive for a large number of people, and that a human therapist may not actually be capable of treating you because of personal incompatibility; which often results in retraumatization in patients who are seeking therapy for particularly traumatic or sensitive issues. Since much of the value in therapy is learning management strategies that, while not standard, are often consistent across different practitioners, they do not necessarily need to come from a therapist to learn what they are (even if the practice of them does need one).

I think if there is a need for it, that need is a consequence of the deeply dysfunctional, exploitative, and isolating system we live under, and I don’t think I’d ever accept it as a genuine alternative to human therapists. But, we can’t dismiss it out of hand if there are people who say it is useful for them and when we can’t maintain a system that can guarantee them access to treatment.

You’re telling me that you believe you are not vulnerable to validation? Right before using the word “corrupted” uncritically in a way that suggests there is a universal and normative “real life?”

What if someone who you respected the authority of, like a prominent scholar or filmmaker, said your obviously incorrect stance on things was correct? You’d trust me, Online Internet Bastard, when I tell you that you are wrong?

AI has been sold as something exceptionally capable of mimicking human knowledge, and its existence is compatible with liberal notions of “objectivity” in that it is quite literally not a human being. Most men subscribe to this authority, and are also statistically bereft of emotional intelligence or management skills. You ever try telling a man what they want to hear? I’ve never ever met one who doesn’t just eat it up.

Why not ban ownership?

We couldn’t, because this is an internet comment thread and you don’t seem to understand how these topics intersect. Also, yes, someone who is invited to some NATO workshop is not likely to be qualified to answer my questions by merit of it being a workshop for experts in the exact thing I am saying is not sufficient to.

Oh, what I was talking about would still be a top down analysis, just one that is more informed and nuanced to create better explanations. Economic and political lenses exclusively tend to be distortive and only useful for people who subscribe to their preexisting explanations for things (and it doesn’t seem like this person is qualified to produce those beyond their individual experiences).

I see, checked them out a bit. Kind of frustrating that it appears as though this is just someone who has worked in defense contracting and the sources they list are just typically news sites (which indicates to me they don’t have access to or do not use whatever scholarly access they would have if they have a degree related to this). So, they seem like more of a reporter who is aggregating news coverage with some public documentation.

I’m sure their videos can be informative, but I’m more curious about how this is argued and measured as many experts in these fields are pretty incapable of articulating how systemic, material, and social conditions facilitate instances like this and how reflective they are of individuals’ decisions or systemic dysfunction.

Right, do you have any sources on that I can check out?

I’m not super well versed on all of this in Ukraine, is there a reason this suggests that this was unavoidable before?

nothing worse than a self-righteous liberal who doesn’t even know they’re a fascist. You know what the right choice is, do it.

Lmfao, you’re shadowboxing yourself. I never even mentioned porn, so I know you’re just assuming these things because you’re pissed at other women, and I can only deduce you’re making up shit they say too.

Weirdest exchange I’ve had on here tbh, I don’t think I’ve had anyone genuinely try to fight me over shit they made up about what other people have said.

Women love me, and I don’t give a shit about men hating me. You’re wondering why you’re an incel? It’s because you clearly don’t see them as people. Only way to stop seeing people like me is to stay inside off the internet forever or kill yourself, you can pick whichever.

Is this comment meant for another thread…? I don’t know what the sweet shit you’re referring to. Nowhere here or anywhere have I said anything in support of porn bans.

Is this written with like, the assumption that being anti-misogyny is somehow synonymous with being pro-state? Either you’ve got the brainrot from all the bots that feed you your own viewpoints all the time, or this is seriously meant for someone else.

Feminists are often anti-porn on the basis of challenging the male gaze and recognition of the inherent coercion within a capitalist system eroding the ability of women to consent… is that what you think you’re referring to? I agree with these feminist views, but they in no way directly correlate with something like the anti-porn ban in the UK, exactly because it is obviously puritanical in nature and therefore patriarchal.

Honestly fucking doubt it, have you seen this site? Even then, internalized misogyny and transmisogyny is a thing. I also don’t give a shit if they are.

You embarrassed yourself online because you have a weird offense to even the notion that weed can be used for medicinal purposes. So much so that you didn’t just smugly say shit that is demonstrably false, but even refused to admit you didn’t research well enough or consider what a person who actually has to check these things would need to look out for in this sort of bureaucratic control.

Clownish. Won’t be reading whatever you send next.

I’m not in the US, and I know for an absolute fact that mine isnt. Even if that were all true, guess what, that permit would not qualify me to move there with my medication as it is not permanent. Even if that wasn’t the fucking case, then I would still not want to risk a lapse in renewing my permit or filing it improperly and losing access to my medication or worse.

You do not know enough about this topic to be so dedicated to pushing misinformation. Fuckin internet dudes die on hills they don’t even care about enough to look up shit, why?

Ain’t cannabis, which is exactly my point since the classification of “narcotic” is too arbitrary to justify the sentence of death, but thanks for the pop medsci slop.

I already knew you weren’t. Could you explain how you think you’re in a position to determine if something is misogynistic? Like, you believe that you can tell women they aren’t harmed by a thing? Why? What are the consequences of this assertion that diminishes the voice of women?

Good, then stop trying to talk to me, dummy.

lol, go do them then loser.