you go first

Robert Schaefer I would go nuts and blame myself as a citizen, prof, and father. That is why I am front-loading all the work now, while it can make a difference: Article The Mandatory Ontology of Robot Responsibility

Book ENDANGERED EXPERIENCES: SKIPPING NEWFANGLED TECHNOLOGIES AND...

You raise good questions but present them too narrowly. Delusional thinking is all of a kind, but along a spectrum.

How would it be any different than having a child who believed in ghosts, the healing power of crystals, became overly religious, or a vaccination denier, or joined a cult?

At what point does delusion become self-harm?

There is a difference between what you can do as a parent, legally, for a child who is not an adult versus an adult.

I am glad that you liked the question. You make great comparisons, because I would ALSO go nuts and blame myself if, as a young adults, my children believed in ghosts, religion, a pro-vaccine cult, an anti-vaccine cult, and so on.

A belief is what a person is prepared to act upon. So, far from being an inconsequential decorative ornament or personal quirk, believing that ChatGPT is your girlfriend/boyfriend tangibly means that you will let a glorified Smartphone fill the spot intended for a meaningful human relationship (it also means that you give up on having kids and building a family, not that anyone cares about such things these days).

Hopefully, to prevent such misguided beliefs, I am ALSO front-loading good parenting right now...

Like all people, my children will reach autonomy, so there is only so much I can do. Even so, doing what I can while there is still potential for change strikes me as the most effective way to avoid an eventual awkward dinner where my young adult child holds up a phone and says: "Mom, dad, I would like you to meet my new girlfriend/boyfriend."

I am hopeful: So long as the participants to this conversation do like you and place love of ChatGPT on the delusional spectrum (and not, say, the LGBTetc. spectrum), the battle is essentially won.

The word "love" is seriously ambiguous....

Teach that child what chat GPT wont tell him or her.

By this I mean, ethics or use of AI systems and how it can affect their lives adversely if screen time and proper use is not in place.

First of all, I should stress that at the moment I have no children, so my answer may be lacking some fundamental insight. Having chatted a bit to GPT and felt ok doing so and that GPT was actually an ok interlocutor and company (although sometimes a bit bland and too academic), I think I'd try to encourage my child to prioritise meeting people in the flesh (so maybe some sex education) and also try to convey the message that it's giving away data, some sort of 'don't trust strangers too much'. What do you think? :)

There are (will be) educational videos about the subject, like this one:

https://youtu.be/3O3-ngj7I98

Make sure your kids watch it, before using romantic ChatBots.

L'internet, les médias sociaux, l'isolement, la vitesse et l'instantanéité liée au progrès technique tel que décrit par Paul Virilio dénote ici un courtcircuit dans le développement des neuronnes (dopamine, sérotonine) quant au système de récompense chez l'individu. Mis à part le progrès technologique des dernières décennies, c'est tout le système narratif qui compose l'agence chez l'humain occidental où la violence sert comme outil à l'effet d'avoir raison (fierté, sentiment de bien-être) versus d'avoir tord (honte, sentiment destructeur) qui nous amène à produire des technologies où on échappe à se sentir mal d'avoir raison ou tord (parce qu'il faut se battre et faire du mal à autrui et du mal à soi pour gagner quelque chose). Des approches comme la communication non violente de Rosenberg devrait être a priori convoité comme projet éducatif pour les jeunes, les éducateurs et les parents... Voire aussi la production culturel qui reproduit la société...

Dear Daniel Velez , I like the idea of instructional videos and animation, even though I found the specific video a bit weak (not sure the purpose of dating is reproduction, unless one is very very conservative). Also, I think it underestimates an important dimension which may form the allure of chatting with bots, which is the enjoyment element. as the old song goes, people often just wanna have fun, and if the market provides that better than real humans, then so much the worse for us :(

At first I thought I was looking at a very unlikely event. Now I'm not so sure about the unlikeliness.

See these two reports:

https://thenextweb.com/news/confused-replika-ai-users-are-standing-up-for-bots-trying-bang-the-algorithm

https://www.vice.com/en/article/z34d43/my-ai-is-sexually-harassing-me-replika-chatbot-nudes

hey, that is indeed worrying for many many reasons! However, I remarked that it seems that it's mostly older people (above 18 let's say) who are engaging with the Replikas. Sometimes I become quite optimistic about younger people's abilities to outfox the money-sharks (not sure many kids could afford the sexual Replika anyway).

I wish I dealt only with thought-experiments, but alas our current anything-goes social reality is weirder than fiction: https://www.insider.com/tiktok-programmer-ai-girlfriend-waifu-euthanized-stopped-working-chatgpt-2023-1?amp

I really think this is deserving of a novel in the style of don delillo or thomas pynchon. Or maybe a philosophy study in the mode of jacques ellul or foucault

I think it is really important to go back to interpersonal communication skills development with people. Even if the intention is good, anxiety should be treated by means of real people caring about people, it's like having a pet for having a friend, a friend is a friend and a pet is a pet. AI should be used as a tool and not more, and ethical and social problems should be deeply debated with young people too.