All Wild All Flower 🌼

Mermaid & poet & health equity | 2024 @penamerica Emerging Voices Fellow | @diabetesPAC Champion |
Commissioner: @TownofPlymouth

[All Wild All Flower 🌼 @Tzynya]

https://t.co/KTQw7AB9oV

[Protect Kamala Harris ✊ @DisavowTrump20]

RETWEET if you stand with Michelle Obama!

[Harvard Book Store @HarvardBooks]

We know many of you will have questions. Please direct those to [email protected].

[Unlearn16 @unlearn16tweet]

American History 101

[Page Six @PageSix]

"Today" co-host Savannah Guthrie got emotional while talking about her mother Nancy 💔

[All Wild All Flower 🌼 @Tzynya]

@pagetpaget @itcalledsplenda You guys look wonderful!

[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.

[All Wild All Flower 🌼 @Tzynya]

@Vallogor @ZainabSana2622 We say "it takes two" this to blame women for bad male behavior. Like I said, a head on collision can be fault of two drivers or one.

[All Wild All Flower 🌼 @Tzynya]

@Vallogor @ZainabSana2622 It does not take two people to ruin a relationship. That's like saying it takes two people to cause a traffic accident. It can, but not necessarily. One person can break a thing just fine.

[All Wild All Flower 🌼 @Tzynya]

I've walked around with The Intentions of Thunder by @pswordwoman in my purse, car, backpack for months like a lifeline. So excited to see it as a finalist for @PulitzerPrizes.

[All Wild All Flower 🌼 @Tzynya]

@unlearn16tweet Gen-X for the win!

[All Wild All Flower 🌼 @Tzynya]

@unlearn16tweet Thank you!

[Unlearn16 @unlearn16tweet]

The more you know.

[All Wild All Flower 🌼 @Tzynya]

@unlearn16tweet 🤣

[Governor Maura Healey @MassGovernor]

Happy Patriots Day, Massachusetts! 💙💛

Runners from around the world are here for the Boston Marathon, but today, they’re all part of something uniquely ours.

However you got here, whatever your reason—good luck. See you at the finish line 👟🏁

[All Wild All Flower 🌼 @Tzynya]

@isaiahjeff66294 @4Cobey Don't argue with this bot.

[WCVB-TV Boston @WCVB]

They said no. She ran anyway. In 1966, Bobbi Gibb ran the Boston Marathon after being told women weren’t allowed — becoming the first woman to complete the race. Now, thousands follow in her footsteps. https://t.co/jHsnqxOr1a

[Only In Boston @OnlyInBOS]

Remember Boston Police Officer Dennis Simmonds, who died 12 years ago after complications from injuries sustained during the shootout with the Marathon attackers.

His service and sacrifice will never be forgotten.

[Only In Boston @OnlyInBOS]

At Mile 2 of the Boston Marathon, a statue honors Spencer, the beloved dog who cheered on runners year after year.

He passed away at 13 after battling cancer.

💛💙

[Conor Nolan @conor_draws]

I won.

[All Wild All Flower 🌼 @Tzynya]

@blackishpress @rolandsmartin DEI is a bad word everywhere across all industries.