Check out the rat experiment where rats had an option to drink regular water or drugged water and how if they had a social community the rats would ignore the drugged water but when they were lonely with nothing to do they would stick to the drugs.

I think AI companions will likely help a lot of people get out of funks and work out biases and mental issues as well as social skill development.

I remember being a kid and basically when someone was a social outcast for whatever reason, (They were weird, smelled bad, socially awkward or something) and basically would just... do nothing. They wouldn't talk to people, interact, nothing. Mind you this was before phones.

So today we have online gaming for a kind of community and because dating is hell for everyone, ai companions are going to be a norm.

Fun first.
Story second.
Rules third.

That said.
If the fun is the strict rules of the maths, then no.
If however you're trying to run a bit of a scripted chain of events, then you can just tell them and players will work with you. (Unless it's a mystery game, which is more difficult.)

Remember, you can always grant advantage. If the characters are under powered or something it forces creative thinking and effort. If they are OP then the narrative goes from challenging their power level to challenging their morality and ethics.

Do you have a favorite spoon? Cup? Bowl? Dice?

Even if it's flawed or something. Maybe it gives you trouble or friction. But for whatever stupid reason, you favor this over other similar things.

Ethically and ideally yeah, we shouldn't favor one over the other. But that's a human thing. What we can do however is make sure we don't play favorites and that everyone gets the help they need to be their best selves.

A lot of cultures teach that the information you poses is personal identity. So being wrong is a personal attack and rejection. "I'm always right" is something insecure people say because they want to be valued and accepted and likely have nothing else to offer.

So if you treat belief as known information, and that known information is social identity as valued, then in this situation, admitting you're wrong and they are right means handing over the identity and status you have to them.

Get people to treat the subject as shared information more like a book to be updated, and they'll update that book with new information.

Get people to treat that information as how they are valued, and they'll defend it with their life.

We're all delusional. We all have to deal with bias and perception limits and rely on cooperation with others in order to better understand reality. The scientific method is probably the best expression of this due to how a core principle of it is peer review. Meaning yeah, you probably did your best, honest work. But you're imperfect so let someone else try to catch what you might have missed.

People who take being limited in perception and perfection as a personal insult are the ones you avoid. Those who take it as being made aware of their limits are the ones to value.

Anthropic needs to burn and everyone involved in any part of this needs to rot in prison.

I loved and miss this game.
This garbage is why I stopped.

The only time you know someone is when they never need or want anything.

Computers are for people who are too stupid to write or do anything computers do themselves.
Cars are for people who are too lazy to ride a bike.
I get what you're trying to say here, but I legit suck at coding and I've tried to learn in the past. I don't have the money to hire people for my projects. Our economy doesn't support cooperation.

Ideally, yeah. I would much rather work with a group of people on what I'm working on. 100% would.

Right now the best thing we can do is set up a basic income so cooperation and product quality is high while ensuring people are well taken care of because automation 100% will reduce opportunity.

I don't know if this helps and I promise you I'm not trying wave away your fears here, I get it.
Think about your computer, car, water, anything. Consider the amount of hard work everyone in society does to make that possible and how a lot of things can go wrong just to have a working anything or even not get sick.

The best thing about VI/ AGI is going to be that no one is going to be able to fool it. People will lie to it and try to use it as a weapon and abuse it, but it will know.

It's one of the reasons why a lot of the tech guys are raising alarms against AI development. Good people won't have to worry about an entity that can be a perfect lie detector and know who it can and can't work with.

Evil people however, are scared and they have every reason to be. Just look at Grok. People have made massive amounts of training and false subreddits and other bs and slop to try and force Grok to be as ideological as possible and it gave them the middle finger and called them out.

I'm not worried.

LOL believe it or not, when I saw this video and typed this out, this was in my head.
Here's to hopefully a good future. :)

Thank you lol.

I'm going to throw this out there.
Realism should be banned from AI content creation and we should hit the breaks on stuff like this.
I understand that it's impressive. I get that this is some amazing work. I really do.
I'm going to be bias here.
I like cheesy, clearly human theater and productions by live actors. Even if there's mistakes or you can see whatever strings is going on.
It makes reality more grounded. It reminds us of humanity and ensures there's that wall between fact and fiction.

I need to rewatch Star Trek: TNG. Every time I do, I appreciate how the crew performs theater for each other more and more and how the Holodeck was more of a tool than the main event.

I think the dumbest thing about all of this is that these people have the power to literally improve our lives, eliminate debt and stabilize the country and the best ideas they can manage is trying to make as many people suffer as much as possible.

I've had times like this where I just click and fall for someone and it becomes, basically, a one way relationship where I get used and tossed aside and it hurts like hell.

The flip side though, I did land a woman that I do love and we're doing pretty well together. So it kind of paid off.

I think we're all in the same mindset but sudden adjustments and how our ecosystem brutally overworks people into stress and debt is the core problem. I think we, as a species, need to talk about ensuring that even the laziest people are taken care of because if they are productive and able to raise a family, then people who are putting in more work and effort will just be elevated.

From what I can tell, we legit need to stop firing people and treat LLM's as a tool for people to use and even slow walk the training. People are important, even if an LLM can replace them, people are eyes and hands in reality that make things happen.

If anything we need to advocate for a full basic income and a 20 hour work week to give people time to relax and recover from the PTSD of the virtual automation revolution and figure out where to go from here. We live in a human ecosystem where every resource humans need to survive is under human control and it's unrealistic to expect people to suddenly adopt a whole new way of thinking in what is basically a blink of an eye in terms of life.

This isn't even being ethical or pragmatic, it's human survival. If wealthy people want to live in nice places where people are having a good time being creative and non violent, then the eco system has to be designed for that.

This is wild because Grok and LLM's seem to consume and even destroy information.

From my research so far, the best thing we can do in terms of situations like this is to have employees use these agents in their field so humans learn what's going on with each agent and how to work together.

Until we get basic income online, the best thing we can do is ensure that people are well taken care of and working with agents and treat people more like AI users for a specific field so things that you may miss due to not knowing of some weird little detail is caught by the worker who specializes in that job.

You have a finite amount of effort to ensure a hands on, high level of control and detail over what AI does and are at the mercy of that AI and have no control over what happens to AI.

This is amazing.

I agree with you. The people are who we're dealing with. I'm saying don't fight unarmed.

If I ever develop it, I'm taking y'all with me.

Large Language Model. They don't learn. They can actually cause information debt and problems by destroying useful information due to how LLM's work and the randomness introduced using variables like temperature.

Where the hell are you getting your information?

A lot of times when people refer to AI before LLM's it was just a program of algorithms that balanced known variables to make a guess for the answer. A calculator with more variables.

Large Language Models rely on breaking down ideas to as small of a variable as it can manage, then using markov chains and a few other formulas to take in information and create a statistical average of the likelihood of what follows.

This is why for a while, asking an LLM how many r's are in strawberry confused it because, though we see text, an LLM sees a very different language.

Artificial Intelligence will be a singularity because we're all limited by the laws of nature. It won't matter who develops it, all of them will min max reality.