Indeed, there are prior accounts of people becoming delusional (de novo) when engaging in chat conversations with other people on the internet. While establishing causality in such cases is of course inherently difficult, it seems plausible for this to happen for individuals prone to psychosis. I would argue that the risk of something similar occurring due to interaction with generative AI chatbots is even higher.
...
On this background, I provide 5 examples of potential delusions (from the perspective of the individuals experiencing them) that could plausibly arise due to interaction with generative AI chatbots:
Delusion of persecution: “This chatbot is not controlled by a tech company, but by a foreign intelligence agency using it to spy on me. I have formatted the hard disk on my computer as a consequence, but my roommate keeps using the chatbot, so the spying continues.”
Delusion of reference: “It is evident from the words used in this series of answers that the chatbot is writing to me personally and specifically with a message, the content of which I am unfortunately not allowed to convey to you.”
Thought broadcasting: “Many of the chatbot’s answers to its users are in fact my thoughts being transmitted via the internet.”
Delusion of guilt: “Due to my many questions to the chatbot, I have taken up time from people who really needed the chatbot’s help, but could not access it. I also think that I have somehow harmed the chatbot’s performance as it has used my incompetent feedback for its ongoing learning.”
Delusion of grandeur: “I was up all night corresponding with the chatbot and have developed a hypothesis for carbon reduction that will save the planet. I have just emailed it to Al Gore.”
While these examples are of course strictly hypothetical, I am convinced that individuals prone to psychosis will experience, or are already experiencing, analog delusions while interacting with generative AI chatbots. I will, therefore, encourage clinicians to (1) be aware of this possibility, and (2) become acquainted with generative AI chatbots in order to understand what their patients may be reacting to and guide them appropriately.
This seems like the best or most accurate forecast to me.
A lot of the other examples people are listing are about (1) superintelligences and / or (2) models deliberately doing persuasion or crazy-inducing as an instrumental means of getting downstream effects, neither of which I think is true of what we’ve seen so far.
What do you think about this, written in 2018. Not as specific as Østergaard, but predates him and also not specifically about superintelligence or downstream effects (like trying to get out of a box).
AIs could give us new options that are irresistible to some parts of our motivational systems, like more powerful versions of video game and social media addiction. In the course of trying to figure out what we most want or like, they could in effect be searching for adversarial examples on our value functions. At our own request or in a sincere attempt to help us, they could generate philosophical or moral arguments that are wrong but extremely persuasive.
Yes, psychiatrics researcher Søren Østergaard did in August 2023 in advance of seeing any cases!
...
This seems like the best or most accurate forecast to me.
A lot of the other examples people are listing are about (1) superintelligences and / or (2) models deliberately doing persuasion or crazy-inducing as an instrumental means of getting downstream effects, neither of which I think is true of what we’ve seen so far.
What do you think about this, written in 2018. Not as specific as Østergaard, but predates him and also not specifically about superintelligence or downstream effects (like trying to get out of a box).