"Why is it OK to use a metric" is a weird question to ask. Why wouldn't it be OK?

You could certainly try and take other things into account but... do you believe that the UK government does not consider any metrics except GDP when designing policy? Do you believe that voters don't consider any other outcomes when deciding whom to vote for? These are clearly not the case, and using several metrics together is equivalent to tweaking one metric to incorporate additional facts.

The way we really see the particular example you picked is by comparing unpaid and paid childcare. So the government could subtract paid childcare from headline GDP statistics, on the assumption that what that actually pays for is something that would otherwise happen anyway without payment.

But what would making this tweak achieve? Do you think people are out there pushing for an expansion to free childcare because it would make GDP figures go up? Because I think we push for that because it's the right thing to do for society.

As for my example, I think if you thought a little bit you'd see how practical ways of measuring depression (such as numbers of diagnoses in the NHS) would be subject to the same perverse incentives you're talking about with how GDP is measured. You suggested some proxies for wellbeing. Let's take number of sick days: the perverse incentive there would be that the government might launch a crackdown on slackers taking sick days they don't need to make the numbers look better, even though that's bad for society.

Maybe this isn't the kind of thing you're worried about with GDP, but then I don't really knwo what is.

It's called driver config and it's not a tremendously complicated bit of software. Most of its functionality doesn't need to "inject into games" - it just needs to remap the inputs so the driver can present them in whatever way works for the game. If the game doesn't support anything sensible, then maybe fancy stuff is warranted, and you might well miss out on that from a driver config utility. But that's OK.

Well you certainly aren't giving me any reason to agree... :/

The objective reality of an AI hallucination being wrong is not what's important though; what is important is the effect it has on people, which will in part be subjective.

Nothing prevents you from comparing harms and ease of checking.

Fact!

Well that's not quite what I said. But either way, I think it's pretty clear. What are some examples you think lie in the grey area?

It's comparable because it's a negative outcome that may cost something (cooking a new meal, ordering a takeaway) to fix, but can be checked quite easily. Information that is factually incorrect has a negative outcome as well, and can also be checked quite easily - but the negative outcome, and the ease of checking, varies vastly across the space of all possible information.

I am encouraging you to think about situations where the negative outcome is not that bad, and the ease of checking quite high. Does that make using AI more practical?

If you are using the bot just to perform things that you could easily look up, then yes, that is pointless.

My strong suspicion is that there is no way to make search good again, because the internet is a lot shitter.

There's a clear difference between an organisation intentionally created as a cult in living memory and one which, as far as we all know, arose organically from the sincere beliefs of people.

It doesn't make the beliefs of one more true or something, it's just a useful categorisation.

I still often say "Jesus" the way that actor delivered that line

Dick down December

Sissy September

Norks November

Jelly July

Milf march