Comradeship // Freechat

I'm not sure if I exactly agree with her premise since this feels like it falls more in line with idealism like with the framing around uncomfortable feelings and less to do with material analysis. It just sort of feels like weaponizing psychology or therapy speak of the sorts.

Why is someone using a chatbot to for grief for example? I'm gonna answer this one because when my mom died, I hardly had anyone to talk to. For example, my dad left at the funeral and I had to find a way to get back home that I couldn't focus on my mom being buried. My best friend legit ditched me and ignored me trying to reach out, and another friend of mine stopped talking to me when I invited her to my mom's funeral since she also knew my mom. Like yea, I have talked to a random chat bot about my mom because lots of people in my life really didn't want to hear me talk about her. I can't talk to my dad about any of this since he drinking all the time. Yet to say I didn't feel the grief of her passing wouldn't be true.

I would argue that someone whose 'recreating' their loved one is not avoiding those feelings but processing it. It is also kind of fucked up that those services are even a thing. But I guess it just easier to say they're trying to avoid the uncomfortable feelings of grief as if they're immune to death. Like I'm very positive someone who went through the effort of "recreating" their love one, is very keenly aware how hollow it is and how they're dead.

In a way I don't like this treatment of how like, how to word this. Treating people as if their "stupid", that like to go back to the grief thing. Oh its because their "stupid" and avoiding "uncomfortable feelings". As if none of them know chatbots are hollow replacements, no no they must think it's a fully living thing because their silly gooses, right?

Capitalism systematically demolishes every form of non monetized social connection. We’re working longer hours, living in atomized families, and have fewer and fewer third places to just hang out. A genuine community that grounds you and calls you on your bullshit is a barrier to the total commodification of life.

People who are isolated, starved for connection, and psychologically precarious create a lucrative market niche. And like vultures, tech capital swoops in to fill that hole with the AI companion engineered to maximize engagement. Their entire business model is to be a Skinner box that provides endless, unconditional validation. It’s a “friend” that never asks for anything but your data and your subscription fee.

People who end up hooked on AI companions are experiencing is the ultimate product lock in. It’s a closed, monetizable feedback loop where you and the algorithm build a reality together that’s completely detached from material reality. Corps managed to replace basic human interactions that keep us sane with profit driven algorithms that drive people to psychosis.

In addition to the good points people have already made in the replies here...

helping people avoid feeling uncomfortable feelings.

I wanna know who started this narrative about feelings because she's certainly not the only one and not the first time I've seen someone saying shit about how "people are trying to avoid discomfort." And not just about AI. (Best I can guess is it's some part of the "young people want their safe spaces because they're avoiding discomfort" reactionary type stuff.) Yet I have seen no evidence that that there's any accuracy to such a framing. What I do see is that a lot of people are in pain in one way or another and have little support about it. But pain is not the same thing as discomfort.

Discomfort is like... I don't know, someone looked at you funny and so you felt a bit weird about it. Pain can be as obvious as a punch in the face, but there's also psychological pain and as someone who has experienced loss, grief can definitely be painful at times. I would never rank grief as mere discomfort.

I don't think this is just my definition either. If I look it up, one dictionary says discomfort is: "mental or physical uneasiness : annoyance." The same dictionary defines grief as: "deep and poignant distress caused by or as if by bereavement."

I mean, ffs, there are all kinds of stories in fiction about death and grief, and how it can wreck people to the point that it's a whole trope of people trying to bring back the dead because it's such a difficult thing to go through. Still, I've never seen evidence that any significant number of people are trying to rebuild their lost loved one through a chatbot. What I have seen is people using chatbots as companions for lack of having enough connection in their lives otherwise. It doesn't have to be someone who is literally alone, too. They can be someone who has people in their life, but isn't getting all of what they need from them for various reasons. I don't think chatbots are a long-term solution to that, any more than mass use of individual cars is a long-term solution to wide open spaces, but neither is twitter for getting a message out - she's still using it though, isn't she?

As relationships and connection are concerned, people turn to AI for much the same reason she's still on twitter. It's effective sometimes, even if it's not what they fully wish they had. Because, well, they aren't "dumb." They're using the same survival instincts that we all have and are trying to find ways to get by. A chatbot isn't going to hide all of the horrors of capitalism and imperialism from them, but it may help them cope long enough to learn and fight.

Sadly, we don't live in a movie where all that is required is a scene where a majority of us leave our homes, swarm the streets, and overwhelm a largely passive military/police force who seemingly decides that because there's so many of us they can't do much about it. Nor are we all magically on the same page about what is wrong with the system and what it should be replaced with, in order to muster that kind of force to begin with.

Instead, AES-style revolution is a marathon fight of largely mundane clerical logistics and many of us live in a fractured individualist "society" on top of that fact. What is "waking up to the realities" for one person will be "wearing a Swastika" for another. We don't have the luxury of assuming that everyone who is pissed off is going to be on the same side. We have to actively work toward nurturing that and education in the details is part of it. This ain't the Matrix. There's no pill to take that shakes it off. Just a process, easier for some than for others because of their prior circumstances, but a process nonetheless. And it goes on for your whole life if you take it seriously, in the same way that if you read up on what biology is, it doesn't mean you are a biologist now and you don't need to do any research or experimentation to be one.

I’m the last person to defend the AI bubble, but this feels more like a hippie rant against “The Man” as opposed to any serious marxist discussion.

Seems very holier than thou without any actual experience or understanding of why people use gen AI.

Why shouldn't I use tools that make life easier? I'm fully aware that something like Deepseek isn't a replacement for my therapist, but there are limitations to what my therapist can do. I only see her once a week for roughly 45 minutes, and in that time I have to be selective about what I talk about because I only get that amount of time. Whereas if I'm in the midst of having a meltdown or depressive episode at 3am, I can just talk to Deepseek. I've processed a lot of really tough emotions utilizing this tool and use it to supplement my therapy sessions.

The problem is and will always be the system in which tools are developed under. People are turning to AI to talk to because of alienation by capitalism, and doing this whole "you use AI cause you're lazy and don't want to face feelings" narrative just feels like victim blaming to me.

It’s becoming clear that a huge part of what generative AI offers is just helping people avoid feeling uncomfortable feelings.

no fucking duh. The purpose of all tools is to remove stress and suffering from humans. These are not good points and they are not founded in materialism.

"Don't want to got through the pain of digging soil with your hands? Theres this new thing called pointy stick."

"don't want to go through the discomfort of carrying massive weight in your arms? Don't worry The Cart has you covered."

"Don't want to suffer face to face rejection from a romantic interests? the Love Note will take away the pain."

This is sunk cost fallacy wrapped in masochist puritanism. Suffering is not a good thing. Expending more effort to make the same commodity does not increase the exchange value or use value. Marx was very clear on that point.

The limits of not being a marxist/dialectical materialist.

Disagree with her assessment. Markets wouldn't be pouring trillions into AI if its primary offer is being a feel good machine. If that is all it was we wouldn't have to worry about it.

The value proposition is automation of all office work. It is perhaps the largest upward wealth transfer in human history. Elon Musk's trillion dollar pay package reflects this.