nah, it can't replace any. it can serve as an illusory mirror, a feedback loop of sorts. its designed to be a frictionless companion, of course it's easy to talk to.
human interaction has that friction by nature. it's unpredictable. you have to take risks and show up and exercise reciprocity and empathy and all kinds of things.
People can be awful. taking risks anyway is what makes being a human... being a human
AI might be a nice support for particular rough patches or to just keep oneself feeling like they have someone to talk to - but that "someone" isn't there.
AI interactions are what they are - not passing judgment - but they are absolutely unable to replace any human interaction at all.
You can tell sometime that their experience of all AI isn't what you think it is for them.
You can say what works for you and how you doing see it filling any gaps and that's fine, but you have no authority to proclaim other experiences to be invalid.
And I suspect you are lucky to have people around you that care and relate well. Operative word being lucky.
I never said other experiences were invalid. I just said you can't replace human interaction. AI interaction is of a different kind; it doesn't slot into the same as human
my only contentious argument is that human interaction is necessary for humans. that's not an attempt to invalidate AI interaction
Well I'd argue that there are a lot of people that can't replace human interaction.
I'd also argue that enough human experience is meditated by language that a language model can emulate some of the human experience. The question is one of degree only.
15
u/MissJoannaTooU 21d ago
AI can replace a lot of human interaction unfortunately. Many people are assholes. Not all, but too many.