We have no guarantee everyone who uses ChatGPT is a mentally mature adult who understands the limitations of the chatbot. Many criticisms have been raised about how the bot is too sycophantic, such as when it encourages someone displaying schizophrenic behavior to potentially commit violent acts[0] or further harm themselves[1].
Not at all. This article is trying to blame a modern technology for an ages-old issue of mystical faith. Replace "ChatGPT" with a Ouija board, a Séance, or the classic cinematic Gypsy Fortune Teller and you'll get the same result.
Serious relationship crusher: one person sitting on tiktok/reels all day and setting expectations for their own relationship based on that (often staged) content. Really not healthy to constantly have that level of pressure on your head.
> According to reports, the woman asked ChatGPT to interpret the coffee grounds left in her cup — in a lighthearted attempt to mimic traditional fortune-telling. The AI responded, supposedly describing a young woman with the initial “E,” claiming the husband had strong feelings for her and that the relationship would soon become a reality.
ChatGPT is not to blame, they could have gone to a coffee-grounds (human) reader and done the same. If someone can show that human coffee-grounds readers are better than ChatGPT, then there might be a case.
Not sure if this is a controversial opinion but if the wife decides to divorce the husband based on what ChatGPT says, perhaps the husband is better off.
If you read the article, it appears she asked ChatGPT to tell her fortune based on the pattern of coffee grounds in her coffee cup.
Which.. sounds like she was either just looking for any excuse to divorce, or she was already divorced, from reality.
There is no story here about ChatGPT, this could have been anything. It could have been the way a dog barked, or hidden messages in the radio, which we wouldn't associate with dogs or radio.
If we are going to attempt any deeper analysis from this, it should be an analysis of what services are in place for people with mental health issues and how people can be empowered to notice signs to help their loved ones.
The coffee grounds thing is an old folk divination practice in Greece. Not saying it makes sense, but I don’t think it’s any more a sign of mental illness than believing in Jesus or something.
A bunch of subcommunities with odd supernatural-adjacent belief systems have been completely bowled over by chatgpt. A huge amount of "chatgpt told me that i was the savior of the universe" or "chatgpt told me that such and such thing will come true." While it is true that this could have in principle been anything, the predilection of these chatbots to reflect back or generally approve of the opinions of the user is catnip to a bunch of people.
This sort of self-radicalization will only grow. I've already seen too many cases of "chatgpt told me that I am God" in weird corners of reddit.
There was actually a similar thing on this website where someone here claimed in an article comment section that if you feed your wife's emails into ChatGPT it can simulate her well enough to tell you whether she is cheating.
The weird thing is I looked at the posting history of that commenter and it was bland tech comments with no obvious signs of mental health issues.
Reading from the comments here I was expecting at lot more meat about the case, but it's just a report on anonymous reports and what the husband allegedly told to the press ?
Otherwise, does a divorce really need anything more than one party willing to get out of the relationship ?
Even assuming anyone is calling it quits on frivolous grounds, it also means that's how much emotional investment there was left in the first place and they were due for a break any day really.
> Otherwise, does a divorce really need anything more than one party willing to get out of the relationship?
I don't know anything about Greek statutes specifically, but no-fault divorce has actually been a relatively recent development in most legal jurisdictions.
Greece has no-fault (consensual) divorces. It looks like the only strong requirements are having a lawyer oversee the process and both parties agreeing to the conditions.
Divorce is a legal procedure to dissolve a legal union; local rules vary, but while it can be accomplished without standing in court, in the US at least the terms of the dissolution must still be documented and--even if signed by both parties--approved by a judge. One of the most notable pieces of the divorce is the division of the union's assets, which especially in a "no fault" divorce must be "fair" to both parties since neither one is accusing the other of wrongdoing.
_In general_ (I am not a lawyer, I don't know your situation or laws of your area), anything acquired during the marriage is joint property. That can include every paycheck you receive in the span of the marriage, even if the salary is established before marriage, deposited in a personal account, and you were the only one working the entire time.
And that means everything you pay for with that money is also jointly owned, including any mortgage payments using those joint funds. Therefore your (to be ex-)spouse may have stake in any property you own that must be fairly divided. If you bought the house after getting married this may at least be a simple 50/50 split, but if one of you put your whole pre-marriage savings as the down payment you can bet this gets a lot messier.
Speaking of money, if you're making 100K and your spouse makes 50K the union has 150K to sustain a standard of living. After the divorce neither party will be able to keep that same standard of living of course, but one party is more greatly affected than the other. In a "no fault" divorce the outcome must be "fair" to both parties.
But WTF does that even mean? Is it "fair" to have to pay your ex-spouse for being less successful in their career? According to the courts the answer may be, "Yes," especially for any income gained (or lost) during the marriage because, "Pursuing a new job is something you decided _together_, right?"
All that is to say that even if both parties agree that holding onto a failing relationship isn't to anyone's benefit, divorce is something else that either (or both) might not find so agreeable.
When my ex-wife asked for a divorce, I wasn't going to fight over what had already felt by that point a completely one-sided relationship. That helped a lot getting over the emotional shock of the situation, and we did manage a pretty amicable no fault divorce. But it was still was months of debating how much she should get from the two years paid into our 30 year mortgage, and ended with both of us being worse off financially for several more years.
Divorce is not just a break up that you state your waning interest and walk away from; it is a complicated legal process that will force some uncomfortable conversations about things you probably would have never imagined being an issue while you believed the relationship was going well.
Which is not to say you shouldn't do it if your relationship is bad, but if you think your relationship is bound to end on some frivolous grounds you either shouldn't get married in the first place or find relationship help immediately.
I'll be showing my utter lack of romanticism, but I think any long lasting relationship (marriage or not) is on the same boat, the only difference will be how the couple discusses these issues, and whether they have a leg to stand on when shit hits the fan or they're just SOL.
Imagine being in a non-married relationship and taking a mortgage for a house you'll both live in and potentially both pay. You'll still need to have these uncomfortable discussions, probably upfront and not when it goes south. Same if you have a kid, if one quits their job to take care of that kid (or take care of the other if needed).
A marriage will package a defined set of rules to apply to these situations, where not being married will force a lot of case-by-case examination, with probably one end of the relation getting shafted. Some countries (Japan is one, there must be others) have a "not married but could as well be" status for these kind of situations.
What I'm saying is, being in a marriage or not is akin to having a contract or not. It doesn't change what you're supposed to be doing, it will only help to frame the discussion in the dire times. By the same token, breaking up a long lasting relationship shouldn't be about whether the paperwork is a PITA or not, not being in a marriage doesn't make it OK to just screw the other side for instance, hopefully you'll still have the uncomfortable discussions either way.
I think the problem here is old fashioned human stupidity:
> According to reports, the woman asked ChatGPT to interpret the coffee grounds left in her cup — in a lighthearted attempt to mimic traditional fortune-telling
This could just has easily happened with a human fortune teller.
No way a human fortune teller would say something like that in their right mind.
Same as with fortune cookie quips, any "prediction" will be something that sounds deep and intriguing, but always vague enough to be non-falsifiable.
Otherwise, client will come back and confront fortune teller about it. And human one knows it well enough to avoid making an unnecessary headache for themselves.
People have a way of believing anything when the alimony+child support reaches a number where you can just grab (at least a sizeable portion of ) the financial benefits of marriage without having to put in the work of being a partner.
I can just imagine a Kafkaesque future society where people are punished based on a predictive model that is nothing more than an overly complicated random number generator.
That's exactly what Gattaca is about. The fact that the machine scans your genes is honestly quite irrelevant and probably the biggest thing that everyone gets wrong about that movie: Everyone blindly trusts the scanner, but such a scanner cannot possibly exist.
This is already pretty much a thing with pretrial risk assessment algorithms. Sure pretrial detention isn't "punishment" in a narrow legal-technical sense. But for the person in jail the difference doesn't matter.
Readit News
Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer...
Please don't post shallow dismissals...
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
[0]: https://twitter.com/colin_fraser/status/1916994188035690904
[1]: https://twitter.com/AISafetyMemes/status/1916889492172013989
Some humans are insanely stupid and have no self awareness, they were gonna loose with or without AI. At some point it's natural selection at work.
We can't halt technology progress just because some people are stupid.
Serious relationship crusher: one person sitting on tiktok/reels all day and setting expectations for their own relationship based on that (often staged) content. Really not healthy to constantly have that level of pressure on your head.
ChatGPT is not to blame, they could have gone to a coffee-grounds (human) reader and done the same. If someone can show that human coffee-grounds readers are better than ChatGPT, then there might be a case.
Which.. sounds like she was either just looking for any excuse to divorce, or she was already divorced, from reality.
There is no story here about ChatGPT, this could have been anything. It could have been the way a dog barked, or hidden messages in the radio, which we wouldn't associate with dogs or radio.
If we are going to attempt any deeper analysis from this, it should be an analysis of what services are in place for people with mental health issues and how people can be empowered to notice signs to help their loved ones.
This sort of self-radicalization will only grow. I've already seen too many cases of "chatgpt told me that I am God" in weird corners of reddit.
Deleted Comment
The weird thing is I looked at the posting history of that commenter and it was bland tech comments with no obvious signs of mental health issues.
Otherwise, does a divorce really need anything more than one party willing to get out of the relationship ?
Even assuming anyone is calling it quits on frivolous grounds, it also means that's how much emotional investment there was left in the first place and they were due for a break any day really.
I don't know anything about Greek statutes specifically, but no-fault divorce has actually been a relatively recent development in most legal jurisdictions.
https://www.nomikosodigos.info/en/articles/902-mutual-consen...
_In general_ (I am not a lawyer, I don't know your situation or laws of your area), anything acquired during the marriage is joint property. That can include every paycheck you receive in the span of the marriage, even if the salary is established before marriage, deposited in a personal account, and you were the only one working the entire time.
And that means everything you pay for with that money is also jointly owned, including any mortgage payments using those joint funds. Therefore your (to be ex-)spouse may have stake in any property you own that must be fairly divided. If you bought the house after getting married this may at least be a simple 50/50 split, but if one of you put your whole pre-marriage savings as the down payment you can bet this gets a lot messier.
Speaking of money, if you're making 100K and your spouse makes 50K the union has 150K to sustain a standard of living. After the divorce neither party will be able to keep that same standard of living of course, but one party is more greatly affected than the other. In a "no fault" divorce the outcome must be "fair" to both parties.
But WTF does that even mean? Is it "fair" to have to pay your ex-spouse for being less successful in their career? According to the courts the answer may be, "Yes," especially for any income gained (or lost) during the marriage because, "Pursuing a new job is something you decided _together_, right?"
All that is to say that even if both parties agree that holding onto a failing relationship isn't to anyone's benefit, divorce is something else that either (or both) might not find so agreeable.
When my ex-wife asked for a divorce, I wasn't going to fight over what had already felt by that point a completely one-sided relationship. That helped a lot getting over the emotional shock of the situation, and we did manage a pretty amicable no fault divorce. But it was still was months of debating how much she should get from the two years paid into our 30 year mortgage, and ended with both of us being worse off financially for several more years.
Divorce is not just a break up that you state your waning interest and walk away from; it is a complicated legal process that will force some uncomfortable conversations about things you probably would have never imagined being an issue while you believed the relationship was going well.
Which is not to say you shouldn't do it if your relationship is bad, but if you think your relationship is bound to end on some frivolous grounds you either shouldn't get married in the first place or find relationship help immediately.
Imagine being in a non-married relationship and taking a mortgage for a house you'll both live in and potentially both pay. You'll still need to have these uncomfortable discussions, probably upfront and not when it goes south. Same if you have a kid, if one quits their job to take care of that kid (or take care of the other if needed).
A marriage will package a defined set of rules to apply to these situations, where not being married will force a lot of case-by-case examination, with probably one end of the relation getting shafted. Some countries (Japan is one, there must be others) have a "not married but could as well be" status for these kind of situations.
What I'm saying is, being in a marriage or not is akin to having a contract or not. It doesn't change what you're supposed to be doing, it will only help to frame the discussion in the dire times. By the same token, breaking up a long lasting relationship shouldn't be about whether the paperwork is a PITA or not, not being in a marriage doesn't make it OK to just screw the other side for instance, hopefully you'll still have the uncomfortable discussions either way.
People blindly belueving a machine
> According to reports, the woman asked ChatGPT to interpret the coffee grounds left in her cup — in a lighthearted attempt to mimic traditional fortune-telling
This could just has easily happened with a human fortune teller.
Same as with fortune cookie quips, any "prediction" will be something that sounds deep and intriguing, but always vague enough to be non-falsifiable.
Otherwise, client will come back and confront fortune teller about it. And human one knows it well enough to avoid making an unnecessary headache for themselves.
gwern summarizes it appropriately: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14867898
Deleted Comment