43
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2025
43 points (100.0% liked)
Slop.
794 readers
516 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[Ed.: emoji added for emphasis. I couldn't resist]
Oh yeah, I've gone through old shit because I was cleaning and had to stop because reflecting on some of what I dug up left me emotionally shattered. I guess we probably relate to our pasts pretty differently, but that's not surprising since we don't have the same pasts, nor current dispositions. I can't imagine letting a chatbot tell me my old hopes are still worth something though, that's AI psychosis.
I think that the writing he talks about in the article itself is pretty banal, like "family and friends over business" and such, and most of the content is that combined with the AI encouraging him to re-embrace past hopes about starting a school and so on. In terms of his writings that were relayed in the article, the worst you can say about most of it is that it's just very dull.
I feel like if he actually detailed the "epiphany after epiphany," it would reveal itself to be 99.99% like you describe though.
I've happened upon some stuff that really hit me with how much I've changed and how much my interests have changed. Some of it made me sad, because I felt I'd lost something since then. Some of it was nostalgic but something I felt I'd grown past or grown out of. As you say, it's unique to each individual.
I would never want to feed the fragments of my life into a chat bot to let it regurgitate them back at me in a slurry of psychologically damaging slop that I uncritically consume as gospel truth. As you mention, that's just fodder for AI psychosis.
The quoted line below is what led me to think that the article really described less "grief for the past self" and more a lack of growth on the part of the author.
They're describing a chat bot regurgitating their own past musings (from years prior) at them and instead of seeing any of them as something they've moved beyond or something they used to have that they've lost, they see them as a perfect mirror of their current self. Every single response drawn from years-old journal entries apparently perfectly reflected their current mentality.
It's possible that I'm just being uncharitable here on account of my vicious dislike for startup people, but I honestly don't expect that a detailed look at those chat logs would be revealing much unexpected. The following line really makes me think that even more, too.
I think if their "insights" don't require serious engagement to reach, then they probably aren't all that deep. The idea that you can grow and change as a person without introspection by using a chat bot (meaning, the idea the author is presenting that meaningful insight is available "on tap" from LLMs) is unbelievably painful to me.
Yeah, I agree that what he describes as a personal psychological process is terrifying for how loose his grip on reality and seemingly even himself is.
I think your interpretation is maybe slightly incomplete in terms of the mirroring, since he doesn't give that many details about the conversations themselves and, while the "connections over business" part is exactly as you describe, I think the thing about him starting a school is slightly different. That's a circumstance where the version of him in the journals was in some manner superior and he believed he was being prompted to reclaim it. For that reason, I think that part of the post is even sadder than your description.
Edit: I think the "insights" that aren't simply noticing gross patterns are probably grotesquely saccharine and abusive of his obvious emotional vulnerability without concern for external reality.
You know, you're right. I was originally being kind of glib and I think my dislike of startup culture and the pretend-it's-better-than-it-is brand of AI boosting got the better of me, so my "hot take" interpretation was unduly harsh on the author.
What really disturbs me about the whole thing is, as you say, how loose the author's grip on his own sense of self is that the output of an LLM seems to be blowing it around like a leaf in the wind. It actually sucks, and I don't think it's unique at all.