“If you love ChatGPT so much why don’t you marry it!?”
Huh huh!
I miss Paul Ruben :(
chatgpt says you’re insecure
“jubilationtcornpone says ChatGpt is full of shit.”
So I did the inevitable thing and asked ChatGPT what he should do… this is what I got:
This isn’t bad on it’s face. But I’ve got this lingering dread that we’re going to state seeing more nefarious responses at some point in the future.
Like “Your anxiety may be due to low blood sugar. Consider taking a minute to composure yourself, take a deep breath, and have a Snickers. You’re not yourself without Snickers.”
Yeah I was thinking he obviously needs to start responding with chat gpt. Maybe they could just have the two phones use audio mode and have the argument for them instead. Reminds me of that old Star Trek episode where instead of war, belligerent nations just ran a computer simulation of the war and then each side humanely euthanized that many people.
AI: *ding* Our results indicate that you must destroy his Xbox with a baseball bat in a jealous rage.
GF: Do I have to?
AI: You signed the terms and conditions of our service during your Disney+ trial.
Jesus Christ to all the hypotheticals listed here.
Not a judgement on you, friend. You’ve put forward some really good scenarios here and if I’m reading you right you’re kinda getting at how crazy all of this sounds XD
Oh yeah totally—I meant that as an absurd joke haha.
I’m also a little disturbed that people trust chatGPT enough to outsource their relationship communication to it. Every time I’ve tried to run it through it’s paces it seems super impressive and lifelike, but as soon as I try and use it for work subjects I know fairly well, it becomes clear it doesn’t know what’s going on and that it’s basically just making shit up.
I like it as a starting point to a subject I’m going to research. It seems to have mostly the right terminology and a rough idea of what those mean. This helps me to then make more accurate searches on the subject matter.
Yeah I could imagine that. I’ve also been fairly impressed with it for making something more concise and summarized (I sometimes write too much crap and realize it’s too much).
I have a freind who’s been using it to compose all the apologies they don’t actually mean. Lol
That is kinda brilliant
I wouldn’t want to date a bot extension.
Then sexy androids may not be for you.
But what if they are hot?
She’s training herself on AI generated output. We already know what happens when AI trains on AI
I’m a programmer, I’ve already argued with chatgot more than any woman.
NTA but I think it’s worth trying to steel-man (or steel-woman) her point.
I can imagine that part of the motivation is to try and use ChatGPT to actually learn from the previous interaction. Let’s leave the LLM out of the equation for a moment: Imagine that after an argument, your partner would go and do lots of research, one or more of things like:
- read several books focusing on social interactions (non-fiction or fiction or even other forms of art),
- talk in-depth to several experienced therapist and/or psychology researchers and neuroscientists (with varying viewpoints),
- perform several scientific studies on various details of interactions, including relevant physiological factors, Then after doing this ungodly amount of research, she would go back and present her findings back to you, in hopes that you will both learn from this.
Obviously no one can actually do that, but some people might – for good reason of curiosity and self-improvement – feel motivated to do that. So one could think of the OP’s partner’s behavior like a replacement of that research.
That said, even if LLM’s weren’t unreliable, hallucinating and poisoned with junk information, or even if she was magically able to do all that without LLM and with super-human level of scientific accuracy and bias protection, it would … still be a bad move. She would still be the asshole, because OP was not involved in all that research. OP had no say in the process of formulating the problem, let alone in the process of discovering the “answer”.
Even from the most nerdy, “hyper-rational” standpoint: The research would be still an ivory tower research, and assuming that it is applicable in the real world like that is arrogant: it fails to admit the limitations of the researcher.
“I use ChatGPT for” <- at this point I’ve already tuned out, the person speaking this is unworthy of attention
The girlfriend sounds immature for not being able to manage a relationship with another person without resorting to a word guessing machine, and the boyfriend sounds immature for enabling that sort of thing.
Easy, just fine-tune your favorite llm to say you’re always right 😹
What could possibly go wrong.
For real though this is a pretty good way to cope with communication breakdown. Idk why the poster of this comment doesn’t try using chatGPT therapy as well.
This sounds fun. Going to try it during my next argument but first I have to setup a speech to text so that AI is actively listening and then have it parse and respond in realtime to the conversation. Let AI take over the argument while I go have a cappuccino.
Ignoring that this is probably bullshit, I think the bigger problem is that you’ve had multiple bigger and even more smaller arguments in only 8 months. Just break up.
And I thought we left the “just break up over minor inconveniences” mindset behind on Reddit
If you consider multiple big arguments in the first 8 months of a new relationship a “minor inconvenience”, then I hope you only have partners that agree with you and spare all the normal people.
“couple of big arguments and some smaller ones.”
Let’s do a count:
- big arguments: 2
- smaller arguments: at least 3, let’s say 5
- months: 8
- Number of total arguments per month: (2+5) /8 = 0.875 arguments per month = less than 1 argument per month
Tell me, what is an acceptable frequency of arguments for you?
Since we’re playing silly numbers: 0. You can, and likely will, disagree but healthy people shouldn’t escalate into anything resembling an argument.
But speaking of silly numbers. All of those you used. No one says “a couple” when they have a concrete number in mind unless they’re looking to downplay the number. It can be 2, it can be 3, it can be 4. It’s only, definitively, more than 1.
Also, why are big arguments being weighted the same as small arguments? Although I’m not going to quibble over how many small arguments a big argument is “worth” (assuming we take 1 ‘small argument’ as our unit).
Lastly, how often are you seeing each other in the first month that an argument, even a small one, doesn’t throw up red flags. If you REALLY like them on the first date, you’d make time to see them like twice a week or something? I’ll admit that there is leeway here as to what constitutes “dating” someone as some people see potential SOs for weeks (months?) before locking in. I also admit I’m abnormal as I frequently need time to not see people. My point remains that unless you’ve moved in with them as soon as you started dating, you are not seeing each other with enough frequency for that volume of arguments to make sense. Unless the arguments are about the (in)frequency of going on dates.
Some people’s relationships are literally built around arguments and competition and they last decades.
Not every relationship has to fit into your mold.
Idk if you saw my expansion in my comment to chicken in a different subthread.
If you have and this is still your answer, then whatever that’ll be your opinion and I’ll have mine. Some people smoke multiple packs a day and live to 80 but that doesn’t make smoking a healthy thing to do either.
Arguments don’t have to be angry, neither do competitions. Why is arguing and competing with each other unhealthy if it is friendly?
Two married Olympians both competed in women’s volleyball for different countries this year. Obviously they have a competitive marriage. It apparently is working for them.
I’ve never said a single word about competitions in relationships.
Correct. I did:
Some people’s relationships are literally built around arguments and competition and they last decades.
Then you said in reply:
If you have and this is still your answer, then whatever that’ll be your opinion and I’ll have mine. Some people smoke multiple packs a day and live to 80 but that doesn’t make smoking a healthy thing to do either.
So no, you didn’t. You just suggested that what I said was equivalent to smoking multiple packs a day.
Sorry, I didn’t sanitize my output, assuming this would forestalled by the redirect to my other comment explaining I see how I was applying my implicit biases and connotations to what “argument” means.
I didn’t call out the addition of competitions then because I didn’t think this would sprawl as long as it did. I will do so now:
I never said a word about competitions and that, in my mind, has no inherent bearing on the healthiness of a relationship as there can be different types of competition. So we can immediately excise that from further discussion.
Addressing the sole part that is relevant now: I now agree arguments aren’t necessarily angry, by everyone’s definition. But that was the tone and definition with which I made the original comments up until that first reply to chicken.
You can see that segment as a revision of my first reply to you. Have a good whatever.
ChatGPT can’t remember its own name or who made it, any attempt by ChatGPT to deconstruct an argument just results in a jumbled amalgam of argument deconstructions, fuck off with such a fake post.
Use AI to generate images of her being porked by a horse every time she does this.
Or we can not advocate for revenge porn? There are tons of ways to resolve this scenario without resorting to sexual abuse.
Yeah no, I think that’s illegal in my country lol .
This man is probably an asshole and this woman is probably smarter than him.
or…they’re both assholes and she’s a gaslighting psychopath. just going off what evidence is at my disposal.
at this point if you’re with a partner that refuses to acknowledge your needs in the relationship there’s literally no reason to remain in the relationship.
Like her need for him to answer reasonable questions? Why does the origin of the question pose a threat and why doesn’t he give examples? He’s like the rando poster who says ‘hey guys I forgot the passcode to my iPhone, got a workaround for that?’ okay buddy, so you stole a phone then.
if they were reasonable questions then she wouldn’t need AI to ask them.
she’s using AI to analyze her perception of the argument and then attacking him based on a flawed analysis.
he’s not sharing enough info to determine why they have so many arguments nor what they are about.
they’re both being shitty to each other and they both need to acknowledge the relationship is failing due to the individual flaws they have as people.
in a relationship differences can be strengths, similarities can be weaknesses, and personality flaws can be dangerous. it all depends on how those in the relationship deal with their differences, similarities, and flaws.
these two obviously can’t deal.
Are you saying it would be preferable if she was given the same advice from a human or read it in a book? This guy cannot defend his point of view because it’s probably not particularly defensible, the robot is immaterial.
Are you saying it would be preferable if she was given the same advice from a human or read it in a book?
I’ll spell it out for you. Y E S
I’m not going to argue the finer points of how a LLM has literally no concept of human relationships. Or how LLMs give the least effective advice on record.
if you trust a LLM to give anything other than half-baked garbage I genuinely feel sad for any of your current and future partners.
This guy cannot defend his point of view because it’s probably not particularly defensible, the robot is immaterial.
when you have a disagreement in a long-term intimate relationship it’s not about who’s right or wrong. its about what you and your partner can agree on and disagree on and still respect each other.
I’ve been married for almost 10 years, been together for over 20, we don’t agree on everything. I still respect my partners opinion and trust their judgment with my life.
every good relationship is based on trust and respect. both are concepts foreign to LLMs, but not impossible for a real person to comprehend. this is why getting a second opinion from a 3rd party is so effective. even if it’s advice from a book, the idea comes from a separate person.
a good marriage counselor will not choose sides, they aren’t there to judge. a counselor’s first responsibility is to build a bridge of trust with both members of the relationship to open dialogue between the two as a conduit. they do this by asking questions like, “how did that make you feel?” and “tell me more about why you said that to them.”
the goal is open dialogue, and what she is doing by using ChatGPT is removing her voice from the relationship. she’s sitting back and forcing the guy to have relationship building discussions with a LLM. now stop, now think about how fucked up that is.
in their relationship he is expressing what he needs from her, “I want to you stop using ChatGPT and just talk to me.” she refuses and ignores what he needs. in this scenario we don’t know what she needs because he didn’t communicate that. the only thing we can assume based on her actions is that she has a need to be “right”. what did we learn about relationships and being “right”? it’s counterproductive to the goals of a healthy relationship.
my point is, they’re both flawed enough and are failing to communicate. neither are right, and introducing LLMs into a broken relationship is not the answer.
Okay so you don’t trust the robot to give relationship advice, even if that advice is identical to what humans say. The trouble is we never really know where ideas come from. They percolate up into consciousness, unbidden. Did I speak to a robot earlier? Are you speaking to a robot right now? Who knows. All I know is that when someone I love and respect asks me to explain myself I feel that I should do that no matter what.
If she’s using ChatGPT to try and understand behavioural psychology, she’s not smarter than him.
It would be one thing to go off and do some reading and come back with some resources and functional strategies for OP to avoid argumentative fallacies and navigate civil discourse, but she’s using a biased generative AI to armchair diagnose her boyfriend.
“you don’t have the emotional bandwidth to understand what I’m saying” okay, so what if he doesn’t, now what lady? Does ChatGPT have a self development program so your boyfriend can develop the emotional intelligence required to converse with you?
Picking apart an argument is not how you resolve an argument, ChatGPT is picking it apart because she’s prompting it to do that, where as a therapist or couple’s counsellor would actually help address the root issues of the argument.
He’s probably gaslighting her and she doesn’t have anyone else to turn to for a reality check.
His question amounts to ‘how can I continue to shape her reality with my narrative?’
It doesn’t matter what chatgpt or anyone else says, he ought to be able to answer reasonable questions. Note that he doesn’t provide any specific examples. He would get roasted in the comment section.
