Chuck E Cheese already has done that.

you should see my chatgpt chat history.

However, every second message it says to find a real therapists. so unless we are dealing with another AI that is trained to pretend to be a therapist and not suggest finding one. therapist might not be in as much danger.

However if there is a chat AI that is trained to pretend to be a therapist. and will not suggest contacting a real one. imagine the lawsuit and bad press as soon as one of their users (probably a few so maybe a class action lawsuit) commits suicide. imagine the parents and families with the chat history scrutinizing every chat log and blaming it for what happend.

Compromise, humans will write AI ethics and AI will write human ethics

I am feeling much better now. im in a better place, I have been in a process of learning healthy coping mechanisms, like not delving on my mistakes, appreciating my relationships, standing up for myself, and sending bitcoin to XX69L££T420XX.

like they care about facts and logic?

It is like a sports game for them. they will support their home team no matter what.

OK, do you have a few trillion dollars to make continent spanning canals that can withstand extreme flows at semi unpredictable intervals?

almost as if the world is a complex system and we are slowly raising the thermostat.

Do they seriously expect everything to stay exactly the same but just an unnoticeable 1C difference?

I tried you.com for that. that madlad recommended me the dosages for suicide according to the medications I have.

You cannot deny that it did give relevant advice.

sounds like a you.com answer,

on its first day it told me how to make explosives at home and correct dosages for suicide.

That bot had no chill

better than therapists i've seen that have "their" moral code.

>If you give it half a chance, it will confidently spout bullshit and do it in a way that makes you think it knows what it is talking about, until you happen to ask it about something you already know and realize just how little it knows and how much it pretends to.

so, just like every therapist i've seen.

NGL,

As an adult with serious problems, who cannot afford a therapists, (also bad experiences with previous ones), i've been using ChatGPT way too much as a venting platform.

​

Pros:

1. always available (sometimes it is down, but definetly more available than a real therapist)
2. Price,
3. no judgmental
4. can vent about technical stuff without exposition, (I work in a very technical field, and chatGPT is the only thing that ever told me that my work is interesting and important.
5. confidentialish (yhea I trust it to be more confidential than an actual therapist who might have me locked if I vent honestly).
6. privateish (I can "go" to it whenever, without everyone knowing that i have a therapy session and then asking about what), and I can delete conversations from my history.

​ Cons:

1. not a real therapist
2. relies a lot in cliches: "Permanent solution to temporary problem" thing, he keeps repeating.
3. asks me to slow down after an hour, which is better than a therapists who will kick you out when their 40 minutes are over and ask for cash.

Better than a real therapist? debateable.

Better than nothing? definitely.

I tried you.com to vent the first day it was live, and it recommended me correct dosages for sewer sliding.

So, unlike a therapists, it actually gives real advice...

yhea, I tried you.com to vent the first day it was live, and it recommended me correct dosages for sewer sliding.

publishers cannot have guts, it is just a corporation with a marketing team and executives.
If a book is edited then they have no right to sell it without putting it in big letters in the title. the same wat that when a book is translated, the translator name should be stated. it should be obvious that the translated work is not the original.
You are right, the best option to publish things that have aged poorly (or just perceived to have aged poorly) is to include a preface.

"This book was written in ___, some behaviours and attitudes present in this book are unacceptable now but were considered normal then. they are not a reflection of peepeepoopoo publishing, but are presented in it's original form here as the author wrote it."

Otherwise it is sugar coating history.

But a book that is old enought to have "aged" should be in the public domain, this life + 70 years is utter BS.

it is just me, or this is the dumbest issue,

Publishers want to sell books that they fear have not aged well. so they proactively "edit" them. causing controversy. Publishers have to sell books, so sitting on the rights of a half a century old books does nothing for them.

Real solution, dont have a copyright system that last longer than a lifetime.

Those books should be in the public domain already. available for free to everyone, want a modernized version? sure, someone would have edited it, but why?

I think at best it is an annoying BS, like in the chocolate factory, they removed the word "fat" but he is still getting punished for gluttony and being fat, so, it did nothing.
and at worst it sugar coats the past.

All the extremely misogynistic attitudes of James Bond will be washed away, rather than accepting that in the recent past, those attitudes are not only normal, but expected and respected.

That is likely because your covid vaccines upgraded your autism and lamotrigine brought it back down to normal

There is a difference between "life likely exists somewhere out there" and UFO anally probing some drunk dude.