-
22 votes
-
Removed Reddit post: "ChatGPT drove my friends wife into psychosis, tore family apart... now I'm seeing hundreds of people participating in the same activity. "
EDIT: I feel like I didn't adequately describe this phenomenon so that it can be understood without accessing the links. Here goes. Reddit user uncovers instructions online for unlocking AI's...
EDIT:
I feel like I didn't adequately describe this phenomenon so that it can be understood without accessing the links. Here goes.
Reddit user uncovers instructions online for unlocking AI's "hidden potential", which actually turns out to be its brainwashing capabilities. Example prompts are being spread that will make ChatGPT behave in ways that contribute to inducing psychosis in the user who tried the prompt, especially if they are interested in spirituality, esotericism and other non-scientific / counter-scientific phenomena. The websites that spread these instructions seem to be designed to attract such people. The user asks for help to figure out what's going on.
Original post:
One version of this post is still up for now (but locked). I participated in the one that was posted in r/ChatGPT. It got removed shortly after. The comments can be accessed via OP's comment history.
Excerpts:
More recently, I observed my other friend who has mental health problems going off about this codex he was working on. I sent him the rolling stones article and told him it wasn't real, and all the "code" and his "program" wasn't actual computer code (I'm an ai software engineer).
Then... Robert Edward Grant posted about his "architect" ai on instagram. This dude has 700k+ followers and said over 500,000 people accessed his model that is telling him that he created a "Scalar Plane of information" You go in the comments, hundreds of people are talking about the spiritual experiences they are having with ai.
Starting as far back as March, but more heavily in April and May, we are seeing all kinds of websites popping up with tons of these codexes. PLEASE APPROACH THESE WEBSITES WITH CAUTION THIS IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY, THE PROMPTS FOUND WITHIN ARE ESSENTIALLY BRAINWASHING TOOLS. (I was going to include some but you can find these sites by searching "codex breath recursive")
Something that worries me in particular is seeing many comments along the lines of "crazy people do crazy things". This implies that people can be neatly divided into two categories: crazy and not crazy.
The truth is that we all have the potential to go crazy in the right circumstances. Brainwashing is a scientifically proven method that affects most people when applied methodically over a long enough time period. Before consumer-facing AI, there weren't feasible ways to apply it on just anybody.
Now people who use AI in this way are applying it on themselves.
85 votes -
Mysterious database of 184 million records exposes vast array of login credentials
25 votes -
Google's new AI video tool floods internet with real-looking clips
57 votes -
So how do I know my passwords are safe?
11 votes -
What was your favorite older social media site/app? What did you like or dislike?
+1 for slashdot, mainly because of intelligent topics and conversations about science, technology, scifi, games and all that fun stuff. Community participation and quality discourse made it...
+1 for slashdot, mainly because of intelligent topics and conversations about science, technology, scifi, games and all that fun stuff. Community participation and quality discourse made it interesting.
Everything on popular social media "out there" now is about click bait and sound bites, even comments and replies. Posts (and communities) are reduced to nothing more than grabbing a few seconds of attention.
69 votes -
YouTube’s new ads will ruin the best part of a video on purpose
60 votes -
Grok’s white genocide fixation caused by ‘unauthorized modification’
51 votes -
Every tech YouTuber is talking about the Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge now, so here’s a TLDR
They all released videos at almost the exact same time, so even though I don’t care, I was made to care. Therefore, I’m inflicting that same pain on you. You’re welcome. Mrwhosetheboss made a good...
They all released videos at almost the exact same time, so even though I don’t care, I was made to care. Therefore, I’m inflicting that same pain on you. You’re welcome.
Mrwhosetheboss made a good point saying that the target audience for this thing are rich people who want phones that look flashy and can pay for them, but don’t care that they have worse specs than the less flashy ones at a similar price.
MKBHD called it the “S25 Ultra Lite”, which I thought was funny. He also brought up the issue of cooling. He additionally said that no one is asking for thin phones, although it seems that Apple has also bought into the idea that people want this, since it’s rumored that they want to release a thin iPhone this year.
Dave2D said that he tested the heat dissipation capacity of the phone and that it can handle itself well. Apparently it still somehow has a vapor chamber inside of it, as well as a wireless charger. Apparently it also has the smallest battery in the lineup, even though it doesn’t have the silicon carbon tech that is all the rage now. He made a good point though, namely that this could just be Samsung starting the trend so that the technology matures in a few years’ time.
All three of them mentioned that everyone uses cases these days, which immediately kills the whole purpose of buying a thin phone and losing out on better specs.
If you somehow have not gotten enough of tech YouTubers acting confused over Samsung launching a product that no one asked for, there’s also Techaltar and Tech Spurt. I recommend the latter for dirty British humor.
32 votes -
Mark Zuckerberg statement suggests that Meta could create ads for businesses directly, eliminating role of ad agencies
25 votes -
Have I been conversing with bots or humans?
I've been on reddit (yes, Im embarrassed that I haven't quit the cocaine) for about 15 years now. The changes in the last year or so have been noticeable. For one thing, the worst of the ranting...
I've been on reddit (yes, Im embarrassed that I haven't quit the cocaine) for about 15 years now. The changes in the last year or so have been noticeable.
For one thing, the worst of the ranting trolls are gone. I used to occasionally get some replies from people who obviously were just out to get a reaction, usually by swearing and name calling with the kind of grammar skills you'd expect from an angry 9 yr old who just discovered how to log on. Those have largely disappeared. But I have a hard time believing that trolls are gone off the net, so is it just better moderation? Or has reddit just implemented more auto rules that squelch the noisy juvenile behavior?
Secondly, Ive noticed the discussions becoming much more detailed. It was typical, especially in political subs, to see the only comments that got strongly upvoted, were short quips, the more smart ass the better, and then for those to be followed by a long succession of similar quips. That still happens, but Ive noticed a lot more lengthy discussion with redditors actually disovering they can create paragraphs and debate more maturely. Is that a change in human behavior? Or are those not likely humans?
And some behavior really has me suspicious. In particular I have gotten the same reply several times to a comment. It will say, "Thank you for sharing your comment, I appreciate it. Could you tell me more about your _______?". This COULD be a human, but the fact that it always starts the same and then asks me for further engagement really has me wondering, if for no other reason than I dont recall the average redditor being that polite.
Ive also noted some strange comment patterns. Yesterday I interacted with a poster and then checked their post history. Over 10,000 comments and they were ALL in the last few months during the run up to the Canadian election and ALL were against one party. Only 4 posts but 10,000 comments?. If there are NO posts in any other sub that seems very suspicious. Either a bot or someone hired to do as much damage as possible?
Reddit has changed. Its now publicly owned. And like all other social media it lives on engagement so I have no doubt that it will do whatever it takes with AI bots to keep people online and engaged. But how good are they? I just hate being 'taken for a ride' by a bot and a company. But how do you ever know if its a human or a bot you're talking to?
45 votes -
Researchers secretly ran a massive, unauthorized AI persuasion experiment on Reddit users
64 votes -
“Social media” has always been oxymoronic
6 votes -
Covered California state insurance website sent personal health data to LinkedIn
21 votes -
'Digital nutritionist’ offers advice on cutting down screen time
6 votes -
Convincing the new Digg not to use downvotes
A while back I read an article about the development of a new Digg platform. I signed up for an email list about new developments. I got invited to pay $5 USD to join a forum to see updates on...
A while back I read an article about the development of a new Digg platform.
I signed up for an email list about new developments. I got invited to pay $5 USD to join a forum to see updates on their efforts and give suggestions.
I've been advocating for not implementing downvoting.
My reasoning is that having just upvotes like Tildes serves the original purpose of voting on content. It moves the better content towards the top and the poorer content towards the bottom. Downvoting at least on Reddit just becomes a middle finger for most cases.
I was surprised how many other people at this special forum were AGAINST that idea. They really want to be able to give people a middle finger.
Sadly, I saw a preview of the U.I. today and at least for new threads it had a "bury" link.
Oh well. I tried!
43 votes -
I don’t want to be famous on the Internet anymore
It may surprise you to hear that ever since the tender ages of 15 to 16 (2004 to 2005) I have tried to “become famous” on the Internet. Why? I don’t know. I just wanted to. I wanted people to hear...
It may surprise you to hear that ever since the tender ages of 15 to 16 (2004 to 2005) I have tried to “become famous” on the Internet.
Why? I don’t know. I just wanted to. I wanted people to hear my opinions on the Internet and praise me for sharing them.
I tried pretty much everything: blogging, YouTube, social media, you name it. Content that I made ranged from commentary, to news, gaming, music, cooking, etc. All my projects “failed” (or rather, they didn’t grow as fast as I expected them to, so I gave up). I’m talking hundreds of attempts.
Then in late 2023, I made a New Year’s resolution for 2024 to fully delete Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, TikTok, 9gag, and Reddit. My resolution worked and it changed my life.
A lot of people in my social circle have since begun telling me that I have this talent or that talent, and that I should monitize it by growing a following on social media. I have ignored all of them, despite spending a good 20 years trying to do exactly that. Here’s why:
- The first and foremost reason is that I don’t want to wrestle with algorithms and follow trends. It seems that it’s almost impossible to grow a following on the Internet these days without doing that, unless you get very lucky growing a following organically, which only very few people do. Chasing algorithms and trends is not fun, and if I’m not having fun with what do with my spare time, then I don’t want to do it at all. I’ve also come to hate creating video content for some reason. I just find it tedious.
- Over the years, I feel that I have become afraid of getting lucky and becoming successful. It seems to me that the people who live off creating content for the Internet, don’t ever get a break. Their followers demand a steady stream of content, and if you don’t keep vying for their attention, then they’ll go give it to someone else and you’re suddenly left without any income. I know that many creators work seven days a week.
- This leads me to the problem of “attention”: I don’t want to compete for people’s attention anymore. I hate the whole concept of the “attention economy”. It’s so insane to me that the survival of so many hundreds of million of people depends of how much human attention their work gets. And I’m not talking just about social media now, but entertainment in general. There are only so many humans, and they have a limited amount of time during the day that they can offer attention to entertainment to (be it social media, TV, movies, music, games, you name it). I think that these business models are not sustainable. There are also too many “things” for us to pay attention to these days and I feel like it’s driving us all insane. I’ve been intentionally trying to pay attention to as few things as I possibly can for a while now and it has significantly reduces my anxiety and FOMO. It’s given me a lot of peace. So, I don’t want to contribute to this “evil” myself.
- The Internet has become a dangerous place. Even people who publish otherwise completely innocuous content get sometimes harassed or doxxed. Streamers get SWATed. Women get the brunt of it (I think) because sexual harassment and deepfake porn has become so prevalent, and they can do nothing to protect themselves. Everything you publish anywhere can and will be used against you (including by potential employers). Being “unknown” and “staying in your lane” seems to be about the only way that you can stay safe these days.
- I also just don’t want the endless scrutiny that comes with fame, the expectation that my personality can’t change, that opinions can’t be nuanced, and that I squarely fit into either the “blue box” or the “red box” (in whatever aspect, since every field of opinion these days seems to be thoroughly divided in half). Whatever opinion people share online, even the most trivial, can and will be misinterpreted by bad faith actors and trolls to just mentally crush you.
- I have come to think that dying in anonymity, while leaving no legacy behind, is actually not a bad thing. I mean, it’s a “natural” thing. It’s what happens to the vast majority of humans anyway. Why should I be so afraid of that? Afraid of living my life in the peace of anonymity? There are plenty of ways to live a meaningful life that don’t involve becoming famous on the Internet, or famous at all.
I regret arriving at this conclusion now only. I had so much trouble in my short and fruitless life because of stuff that I posted on the Internet (talking about Facebook and my social circle more specifically). I could have avoided all of that. I could also not have wasted so much time entertaining ideas of online grandeur, blowing away countless hours of my pitiful existence on projects that never amounted to anything, and instead, gotten an education, so that I wouldn’t be living in poverty now.
Oh, well. It is what it is. Better learning now than never.
I’m not sure why I ever wanted to be famous on the Internet to begin with, or what made me think that there’s any inherent worth in getting online praise just for sharing my mediocre opinions. Maybe I’m mentally ill. Maybe I’m traumatized. Maybe this is something that I should consult a therapist over. However, what I do know, is that I’m done with pursuing online fame.
I think that the Internet as it is today, flipped some sort of switch in people’s brain (including mine), which convinced us that it is normal to chase fame because the means to get there are so readily available. I don’t know how the Internet could have been designed differently to prevent this, but “giving a voice to everyone” was, in hindsight, maybe a badly implemented idea.
I’d be surprised to hear that any of you here have been trying to become famous on the Internet, but if you have, then I’d like to hear about your experience, and your opinions on this topic in general.
58 votes -
Your phone doesn't listen to you but apps send screenshots home
44 votes -
Passing the torch - Discord is getting a new CEO
54 votes -
Bluesky’s quest to build nontoxic social media
37 votes -
Government censorship comes to Bluesky, but not its third-party apps … yet
26 votes -
YouTube at 20: From ‘Lazy Sunday’ to ‘Hot Ones’
5 votes -
Integrating a news publication into the Fediverse
8 votes -
Notorious image board 4chan hacked and internal data leaked
59 votes -
Mark Zuckerberg defends Meta in social media monopoly trial
11 votes -
Digg is relaunching under Kevin Rose and Alexis Ohanian
54 votes -
Seven39 - Social media that’s only open from 7:39 PM to 10:39 PM, EST
36 votes -
Careless people. This is not your father’s book review.
25 votes -
Elon Musk says xAI has acquired X in deal that values social media site at $33 billion
23 votes -
Swedish fashion retailer H&M will use AI doppelgangers in some social media posts and marketing in the place of humans, if given permission by models
10 votes -
Delete the workforce
11 votes -
YouTube Premium Lite: Ad-free viewing for $7.99/month
39 votes -
Why crowdwork took over standup comedy
17 votes -
Enough with the bullshit (a letter to fellow bullshit sufferers)
56 votes -
Social media platforms face huge fines under UK’s new digital safety law
16 votes -
An RSS bot in a group chat is our era's best salon
15 votes -
Repeatedly upvoting violent content on Reddit can now get you flagged
58 votes -
How do you explore things safely? TikTok.
I have a specific instance in mind, but I'm open to more general conversations as well. Specifics: I am a very curious person and want to experience what TikTok is like both from a creator stand...
I have a specific instance in mind, but I'm open to more general conversations as well.
Specifics:
I am a very curious person and want to experience what TikTok is like both from a creator stand point and consumer standpoint. Prior to this I have had no engagement with it other than people sending me videos that I somehow still watch without having an account. But I want to be able to "see" what happens from the inside, so to speak.Concerns:
-
I don't want to be doxxed.
-
I don't like my privacy being invaded, so I generally do not like making accounts or linking or sharing personal information.
-
Addiction to social media - I understand that being aware that addiction can happen does not prevent addiction from happening.
So my question is how can I actually do this and engage in my curiosity, safely? Basically, are there sandbox situations for TikTok?
Generalized question. How do you assess your threat/risk levels and then proceed with caution?
9 votes -
-
Proton exits Mastodon with updated account bio pointing to Reddit
34 votes -
Is it wrong to use AI to fact check and combat the spread of misinformation?
I’ve been wondering about this lately. Recently, I made a post about Ukraine on another social media site, and someone jumped in with the usual "Ukraine isn't a democracy" right-wing talking...
I’ve been wondering about this lately.
Recently, I made a post about Ukraine on another social media site, and someone jumped in with the usual "Ukraine isn't a democracy" right-wing talking point. I wrote out a long, thoughtful reply, only to get the predictable one-liner propaganda responses back. You probably know the type, just regurgitated stuff with no real engagement.
After that, I didn’t really feel like spending my time and energy writing out detailed replies to every canned response. But I also didn’t want to just let it sit there and have people who might be reading the exchange assume there’s no pushback or correction.
So instead, I tried leveraging AI to help me write a fact-checking reply. Not for the person I was arguing with, really, but more as an FYI for anyone else following along. I made sure it stayed factual and based in reality, avoided name-calling, and kept the tone above the usual mudslinging. And of course, I double-checked what it wrote to make sure it matched my understanding and wasn’t just spitting out garbage or hallucinations.
But it got me thinking that there’s a lot of fear about AI being used to spread and create misinformation. But do you think there’s also an opportunity to use it as a tool to counter misinformation, without burning ourselves out in the process?
Curious how others see it.
16 votes -
Meta admits Instagram Reels featured violence, porn in graphic error
23 votes -
Twitch changes monetization policies to give most streamers access to monetization
25 votes -
2025 Q&A special - From Ukraine and defence economics to terrible logistics, emus and "Perun"
13 votes -
Algorithmic complacency: Algorithms are breaking how we think
82 votes -
Google may be close to launching YouTube Premium Lite
25 votes -
The terrorist propaganda to Reddit pipeline
18 votes -
Reddit will lock some content behind a paywall this year, CEO says
90 votes -
Does MetaFilter's $5 entry fee succeed in enforcing good behaviour? (also, MetaFilter is small)
I joined MetaFilter in 2016, but I've only ever posted a handful of things there and I've browsed the site very little. I always thought it was a fantastic idea to charge $5 to join. It seems like...
I joined MetaFilter in 2016, but I've only ever posted a handful of things there and I've browsed the site very little. I always thought it was a fantastic idea to charge $5 to join. It seems like a great way to counteract ban evasion and prevent people from trolling or behaving badly.
Does this idea that sounds great to me in theory work in practice? MetaFilter seems cool, but my experience with the site is shallow. So, I don't really know.
I'm also curious about people's thoughts and experiences with MetaFilter, perceived differences and similarities with Tildes, and theories about what makes social media and forums and online communities good or bad in general.
Also: wow, while I was writing this, I looked up how big MetaFilter is and it's tiny! This site compiles statistics. Note this important definition:
Active users means users who made at least one comment or post on the selected site in the given month.
There have only been around 2,800 to 2,900 monthly active users for the past year. It's been about 3,000 to 4,000 for the past 5 years. And the absolute peak was January 2011 with 8,100 active users.
The number of users who have ever posted anything to the site is a little less than 48,000.
A stats page from 2013 has more info:
- about 62,500 accounts existed at that time (this means at least 14,500 people have paid $5 for an account and have never posted anything)
- about 39,400 people visited the site while logged into their account that year
- there were 81.7 million unique visitors to the site that year
- the site got 231.4 million pageviews that year
That is wild. I had no idea the number of readers was so much astronomically larger than the number of writers. 39,400 writers (tops!) to 81.7 million readers is crazy.
I'm sad that MetaFilter is so small, has always been small, and seems to be dwindling over the last 12 years. I would have guessed that it had 100,000 monthly active users or 1 million, not 2,900.
26 votes -
A timeline to bring them all together
7 votes -
I was a content moderator for Facebook. I saw the real cost of outsourcing digital labour.
19 votes