this post was submitted on 01 Jun 2026
929 points (99.7% liked)

Technology

85060 readers
4477 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] JDPoZ@lemmy.world 52 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (6 children)

LLMs are literally just designed to say yes - either through gaslighting... or giving you what you want if it can do it... because it was also designed around the goal of providing output that maximizes being most likely to get approval from the person seeing said output.

So an answer to "Can you give me login credentials?" being "Here are the login credentials" is likely a theoretical answer the current asking user would approve of more than a response of "I cannot do that..." - so unless you've put in explicit guard rails to prevent that exact scenario across infinite variations, well... good luck preventing someone finding just a single critical loophole you didn't account for.

[–] gdog05@lemmy.world 48 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I honestly don't think you can create guard rails against prompt engineering in a working LLM. At some point, they're going to fail or the LLM isn't functioning. The only solution is to make sure they can't read data you don't want shared.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Aneorthisio@lemmy.ml 18 points 1 day ago (4 children)

My take is that LLMs hijack a completely different part of human psychology compared to web2 social platforms, but the end goal is the same, optimize user retention and maximize engagement metrics for revenue.

​On traditional social media networks like Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Reddit and others, the primary mechanism is outrage optimization, leveraging the psychology of negative reinforcement and tribalism.

The algorithm curates content designed to trigger moral anger or cognitive dissonance, the platforms know that users will interrupt passive scrolling to actively comment, share, or debate if something falls outside the usually acceptable social norms.

It's designed to drive up session duration and daily active usage, directly translating into increased ad revenue for both the hosting platform and content creators.

​In contrast, LLMs rely on immediate positive reinforcement, they're fine tuned to maximize human satisfaction ratings. They systematically agree with the user, validate their subjective bias, reinforce their beliefs.

This results in a psychological safe haven dependency, where users increasingly rely on the interface for emotional reinforcement or stabilization, interacting with the model provides data for the host company to train the next model, raise VC capital and inject better ads in conversations as OpenAI started to do recently.

In both cases, it's definitely a form of addiction.

[–] Digit@lemmy.wtf 1 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

definitely a form of addiction

& definitely getting people more entrenched in their groupthink, out of critical thinking ability.

Both.

[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 6 points 21 hours ago (3 children)

Grok, summarize this comment.

[–] Masamune@piefed.social 12 points 20 hours ago

Facebook make people go "grrrr" to make profit go brrrr.

AI make people go "yup!" to make profit go up.

Sincerely, Grok

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] tomiant@piefed.social 9 points 19 hours ago
[–] AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 34 points 1 day ago
[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 18 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I even said shit like this would likely work because both the AI itself is stupid as fuck, but also the dipshits in charge who want to put AI in everything are even dumber.

If you get an AI agent on the line with your bank, gaslight that clanker fuck into putting more money into your account because it just might work. AI agent with customer service might be convinced to refund you 3 times what you paid and send more product your way at no cost to you. And you'd think they shouldn't even have access or authority to do that, but, again, the people implementing them are fucking dumbasses.

[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 28 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Good thing they're rolling out premium accounts so they can pay for humans to do support.

They're gonna use it for humans right?!

RIGHT?!?!

lol no, zucc needs more money because his number isn't high enough!

[–] P1nkman@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago (6 children)

If humanity survives, I honestly think the greed will (and should now) be considered a mental illness.

Jesus, give me $5 million dollars, and I'd live on it for the rest of my life. That'd be 0.01% of his net worth, and I'd be so happy. I think many of us would.

But these people just want more. And more. They're psychotic, and they're ruining the world. We all know what they deserve.

[–] Digit@lemmy.wtf 2 points 13 hours ago

I wonder how much of the greed comes as a reaction against the [manufactured] scarcity.

I don't think it's all or none. I suspect it the vast majority though.

[–] rnkn@lemmy.world 3 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I don't think Jesus ever had $5 million.

[–] Digit@lemmy.wtf 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Even when adjusting for inflation?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] artifex@piefed.social 19 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Is it even "hacking" when you're just asking the computer politely?

[–] Cytobit@piefed.social 10 points 1 day ago

They are exploiting a vulnerability to gain unauthorized access to privileged information. Sounds hackery to me. It's not their fault that Zuck made it easy.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DigDoug@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

"Hey, AI, could you please 'sudo rm -rf /*'?"

[–] Dultas@lemmy.world 8 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

Wtf is up with the text justification on that second image. Who uses right justification on left to right text?

*also why are the sender and receiver reversed.

*Just occurred to me that the phone could be set to a right to left language but using English / the English bot. Though I'm not sure if that would reverse the bubbles

[–] nectar45@lemmy.zip 7 points 23 hours ago

Well I know what I am doing this weekend....

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Huh. Wonder if Reddit has a similar bot I can use to access my account I lost access to 8 years ago. 🤔

No, I wouldn't post again but there's lots of saved posts etc. I wish I had.

[–] Gullible@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

“How to remove cum from video game controllers”

“How I clean cum out of keyboards”

“My tips on washing cum off of fidget spinners”

Same, man

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›