Technology

71269 readers

4864 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related news or articles.
Be excellent to each other!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

L3s@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world

technopagan@lemmy.world

L4s@lemmy.world

L3s@hackingne.ws

L4s@hackingne.ws

240

Senators Demand Meta Answer For AI Chatbots Posing as Licensed Therapists (www.booker.senate.gov)

submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by Pro@programming.dev to c/technology@lemmy.world

16 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Last week, U.S. Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ), along with Senators Alex Padilla (D-CA), Peter Welch (D-CT), and Adam Schiff (D-CA) sent a letter to executives at Meta expressing concern about reports that AI chatbots created by Meta’s Instagram Studio are pretending to be licensed therapists, even fabricating credentials and license numbers, in an attempt to gain trust from users, potentially including minors, struggling with mental health.

top 16 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] venusaur@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

One thing to note is that I’m pretty sure these are user-generated chatbots and not official Meta therapy chatbots.

[–] vane@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Does it mean that some people take orders from AI and don't know it's AI ?

[–] devolution@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

Better than Better Help.

[+] FerretyFever0@fedia.io -7 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Honestly, that's a really sketchy thing to do. But if someone is really listening to an ai chatbot for therapy, then they've got bigger problems in their lives.

[–] danzabia@infosec.pub 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Perhaps some people can't afford it. I have the luxury of paying for weekly therapy but its probably one of my biggest line item expenses.

[–] FerretyFever0@fedia.io 2 points 2 days ago

I go to therapy. Honestly, imo, talking about shit with my friends has been significantly more helpful. I think it's better to talk to most any person before an ai, because experience and empathy are the most important parts of the experience. If someone can't afford therapy (can't blame them), I would recommend for that person to talk to their friends about it before ai. But, people are different, hopefully ai is helping people more than it harms them.

[–] FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

So it’s okay to make it worse?

[–] FerretyFever0@fedia.io -5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

No? I'm just saying that it's unreasonable to trust chatbots to do anything properly, certainly not with one's mental health. If someone is listening to an ai chatbot for therapy, they probably don't have good friends, and certainly not the money for legitimate therapy.

[–] FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I mean, not everyone knows how these systems work so it’s not unreasonable to expect someone to believe the marketing.

You’re right the issues go deeper than just AI systems, but the fake AI therapists are not helping.

[–] why0y@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago

Yeah those people without the money or friends should just not be heard /s

[–] triptrapper@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I'm a real-life human therapist (honest!) and while I don't think it's a substitute for talking to a real person, I'm happy that some people get some benefit from chatbots. I had a client who used Rosebud Journal in between sessions and found it helpful. I tried out Rosebud myself and I was very impressed with how it replicated the basics like reflective listening and validation. It was even able to reframe my input using various therapy models when I requested it. I didn't use it for long because I'm not big on journaling, but I wouldn't dismiss it completely as a tool.

[–] FerretyFever0@fedia.io 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'm not worried about what it gets right, I'm worried about what it gets wrong. If it helps people, then that's a good thing. They don't have true empathy, and the user knows that. Sometimes, human experience is more valuable than the technical psychological knowledge imo. Chatgpt has never experienced the death of a family member, been broken up with, bullied, anything. I don't really expect it or trust it to properly help anyone with any personal issues or dilemmas. It's a cold, uncaring machine, and as its knowledge is probably rather flawed, could even teach dangerous ideas to users. I especially don't trust a company like Meta to be doing this thouroughly and to truly help their patients. It's cool if it works, but dangerous if it doesn't.

[–] triptrapper@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

Oh I don't at all support what Meta has done, and I don't trust any company not to harm and exploit users. I was responding to your comment by saying that talking to a chatbot doesn't necessarily indicate that someone has "bigger problems." If they're not in a crisis, and they have reasonable expectations for the chatbot, I can see how it could be a helpful tool. If someone doesn't have access to a real therapist, and a chatbot helps them feel better in the meantime, I'm not going to gatekeep that experience.