schwer-verstaendlich

Kluk, Isarpreiß

[Nini Bela @NiniBela1]

Um ungefähr in die Nähe einer Einschätzung dazu zu kommen:
Was hatte der Patient grundsätzlich?
Weswegen war er in der Reha und in welcher?
Wie war der bisherige Verlauf in der Reha?
Was war der Grund für die anscheinend zuvor geplante Verlegung in die Akutklinik?
🧵

[schwer-verstaendlich @s_verstaendlich]

@MaximuClaudius Ja

[schwer-verstaendlich @s_verstaendlich]

@_sergiotahini Perfekt, ich wollte eh gerade einen Podcast starten.

[Ryan Hart @thisdudelikesAI]

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.

[schwer-verstaendlich @s_verstaendlich]

@taubentussi Wann kickstarter?

[Bent Freiwald @BentFreiwald]

Privatschulen galten für mich lange als Symbol für Abschottung, Elite und Bildungsungerechtigkeit. Ich habe nicht verstanden, warum man sein Kind dort anmeldet.

Dann habe ich Eltern gefragt, die genau das getan haben. Mehr als 300 haben mir geantwortet. THREAD 🧵

[schwer-verstaendlich @s_verstaendlich]

@FranzFuchs3 @willschgerd @AnnaDeMilanese Die katholische Kirche mit den Rattenlinien? Oder die deutschen Christen und ihr Reichsbischoff?

[schwer-verstaendlich @s_verstaendlich]

@MaximuClaudius Dauerhaft verändert heißt natürlich zum Besseren verändert

[schwer-verstaendlich @s_verstaendlich]

@fluegeltyp Doom läuft bestimmt drauf

[schwer-verstaendlich @s_verstaendlich]

@Fotofaehnrich @MaximuClaudius Als Tauschware?

[schwer-verstaendlich @s_verstaendlich]

@EaterOfBrushes Shooty McTower

[euan ashley @euanashley]

New AI paper from us this week. When my student first showed me his initial findings, I really didn’t know what to make of them. I felt that this was an interesting but curious loophole phenomenon that would shortly be closed. I was very wrong.
https://t.co/H3YIyl01FR

[schwer-verstaendlich @s_verstaendlich]

@KampfmitKette @pouletquiaunvis @meidenrespecter Ich dachte der cosplayed nur nen Niederländer. Wieder was gelernt.

[schwer-verstaendlich @s_verstaendlich]

@WolfgangWa1642 @FlorianFlade Im Film ist es ja oft der Underdog, der die Welt rettet. Real gibt es vermutlich genug praktisch und wissenschaftlich qualifizierte Informatiker…

[schwer-verstaendlich @s_verstaendlich]

@baha_jam @michaelvietz Jawohl Herr Politkommisar!

[Maximilian -low credibility- @MaximuClaudius]

Befreundetes Paar [er 87, sie 2.777]
haben sich im Speckgürtel von Bruchtal ein Haus gekauft.

Er verdient als Waldläufer ca. 120k, sie als edle Maid 999k - da sie kein Kindergeld bekommen, hat sie sich entschlossen auf ihre Unsterblichkeit zu verzichten.

[schwer-verstaendlich @s_verstaendlich]

@MaximuClaudius Schön das deine Leistung anerkannt wird und du gelobt 🙃

[schwer-verstaendlich @s_verstaendlich]

@MaximuClaudius Weiß nicht… hab nicht das Gefühl das die SPD sich ohne Hilfe wieder aufrappelt.

[schwer-verstaendlich @s_verstaendlich]

@MaximuClaudius Das weckt Erinnerungen an die örtliche Bibliothek…