The best conversations I still have are with real people, but those are rare. With ChatGPT, I reliably have good conversations, whereas with people, it’s hit or miss, usually miss.

What AI does better:

  • It’s willing to discuss esoteric topics. Most humans prefer to talk about people and events.
  • It’s not driven by emotions or personal bias.
  • It doesn’t make mean, snide, sarcastic, ad hominem, or strawman responses.
  • It understands and responds to my actual view, even from a vague description, whereas humans often misunderstand me and argue against views I don’t hold.
  • It tells me when I’m wrong but without being a jerk about it.

Another noteworthy point is that I’m very likely on the autistic spectrum, and my mind works differently than the average person’s, which probably explains, in part, why I struggle to maintain interest with human-to-human interactions.

  • ContrarianTrail@lemm.eeOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m not using chatGPT to improve my communication skills. I’m using it to have interesting and insightful discussions where I don’t need to debate semantics. It’s entertainment. Better than watchig YouTube atleast which is what I would otherwise do.

    • JamesStallion@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Sure thing, as I say your initial point stands.

      For the sake of discussion only I ask “what is the point of achieving insight if it is too difficult to communicate it to others?”

      • ContrarianTrail@lemm.eeOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’m not sure whether semantics is the right term to describe it, but what I mean is that I can, for example, reference quite esoteric terms or concepts in a sentence, and it immediately knows what I mean. Even if it doesn’t, I can make a small clarification, and it simply gets it. I can then move on to discuss what I actually wanted to talk about, rather than having to explain what I meant by something I previously said, let alone having to defend that concept, like no free will, when that’s not even what I was interested in discussing in the first place.