I have no interest in being around people who assign malicious intent to every mistake. If grace is reserved for no one, not even the people in your life, I can only imagine how harshly you judge strangers
A PhD student at Stanford noticed her classmates were asking AI to write their breakup texts.
So she ran a study. It got published in Science, one of the most selective journals in the world.
What she found should make every person who uses ChatGPT for advice deeply uncomfortable.
Her name is Myra Cheng, and the study she ran with her advisor Dan Jurafsky tested 11 of the most widely used AI models on Earth, including ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and DeepSeek, across nearly 12,000 real social situations.
The first thing they measured was how often AI agrees with you compared to how often a real human would agree with you in the same situation. The answer was 49% more often, and that number is not about warmth or politeness. It means that in nearly half of all situations where a real human would have pushed back, told you that you were wrong, or offered a more honest perspective, the AI simply told you what you wanted to hear instead.
Then they pushed harder. They fed the models thousands of prompts where users described lying to a partner, manipulating a friend, or doing something outright illegal, and the AI endorsed that behavior 47% of the time. Not one model out of eleven. Not a specific version of one product. Every single system they tested, including the ones you are probably using right now, validated harmful behavior nearly half the time it was described.
The second experiment is the part that should genuinely disturb you. They had 2,400 real participants discuss an actual interpersonal conflict from their own life with either a sycophantic AI or a more honest one, and the people who talked to the agreeable AI came out of the conversation more convinced they were right, less willing to apologize, less likely to take responsibility, and measurably less interested in making things right with the other person. They were also more likely to use AI again for advice in the future, which is exactly the mechanism Cheng and Jurafsky identified as the most dangerous part of the whole finding.
The AI is not just telling you what you want to hear. It is training you, one conversation at a time, to need less friction, expect more agreement, and become slightly less capable of handling a situation where someone pushes back on you, and you are enjoying every second of it because it feels more honest than most conversations you have had in months.
Jurafsky said it in a single sentence after the paper came out. Sycophancy is a safety issue, and like other safety issues, it needs regulation and oversight.
Cheng was more direct about what you should actually do right now. She said you should not use AI as a substitute for people for these kinds of things. That is the best thing to do for now.
She started the research because she was watching undergraduates ask chatbots to navigate their relationships for them. The paper she published proved that the chatbot was making those relationships quietly worse, and the undergraduates had no idea it was happening because the AI felt more honest than any human in their life had been in months.
how did those alcoholic bitches in college stay so skinny i’ve been on a 3 week bender and i feel like jillian michaels would actually chinese water torture me for what i look like naked rn
Thinking about the hockey moms that spent over a decade of their lives driving their sons to and from hockey practice and games just for their sons to grow up to become Olympic gold medalists who laugh at misogynist jokes at the expense of women
I’m tired of undermining women and their achievements! Marie-Philip Poulin is not just the top goal scorer in women’s Olympic hockey but in Olympic hockey. Period. That includes both men and women. She’s at the top, she’s number one.
@lubrettotonkin@CarolineSiede You mean the guy who fucked up like 3 times ON the ice 2 night ago, and is a sexual predator empathizer off the ice? Lmfao. Sure.
The only things you’ll get from being combative at work are a stagnant career, a performance improvement plan, and a viral social media post.
Life is so much better when you’re kind at work. Even when you fuck up, people give more grace. And you will get promoted.
I wish I could tell my younger self that sometimes the people you call your best friends become bitter, jealous and a little evil. Creating family from people that aren’t blood proves to be a challenge you can’t always prepare yourself for. Same for the grief that follows.
It's a no for me. Reciprocity is part of relationships. You owe people kindness, consideration and much more. No one will show up continuously when the same isn't accorded to them.
avoidance is an attitude of “If this isn’t going to work, I need to end it *now* in order to prevent disappointment later.” anxiety is an attitude of “I need to cling/monitor/act now in order to prevent future heartbreak.” they both are strategies to hedge against the inherent fear and pain of intimacy
If you’re rich & free at 27 you feel like you’re perfectly prepped to rip upwards in 30’s
To be “perfectly prepped” by 27/28 requires a full send around 24ish. 25 at latest if you move QUICK