Ok but that’s obviously another one of those astroturfed “AI risk” groups. Look at their mission statement and how hyperbolic it is:
METR’s mission is to develop scientific methods to assess catastrophic risks stemming from AI systems’ autonomous capabilities and enable good decision-making about their development.
At some point, AI systems will probably be able to do most of what humans can do, including developing new technologies; starting businesses and making money; finding new cybersecurity exploits and fixes; and more. This could change the world quickly and drastically, with potential for both enormous good and enormous harm. Unfortunately, it’s hard to predict exactly when and how this might happen. Being able to measure the autonomous capabilities of AI systems will allow companies and policymakers to see when AI systems might have very wide-reaching impacts, and to focus their efforts on those high-stakes situations.
The stakes could become very high: it seems very plausible that advanced AI systems could pursue goals that are at odds with what humans want. This could be due to deliberate effort to cause chaos or happen despite the intention to only develop AI systems that are safe.[1] Further, given how quickly things could play out, we don’t think it’s good enough to wait and see whether things seem to be going very wrong. We need to be able to determine whether a given AI system carries significant risk of a global catastrophe.
This is obviously bullshit and glosses over all the real harms that AI is perpetuating right now.
i do wonder tho how one would conduct studies on that?
theres not really a way to measure mental health… in a meaningful way i think
companies claiming “we layer off people because of ai” is more marketing than the actual reason (which is - surprise - profit)
the studies conducted so far have largely looked into very short usage patterns, because… its difficult to track, if you are not literally openai.
maybe im missing something here. cuz having some actual studies (besides this popular paper which tried to sell 'u dont learn when generating with LMs" as “LMs cause cognitive debt”) would be really interesting.
“Recent research found that 17.14-24.19% of adolescents developed AI dependencies over time”
“These findings revealed that 75% turn to AI for advice while 39% perceive AI as a dependable presence, with attachment formation following traditional proximity-seeking, safe haven, and secure base patterns.”
I think the jury is still out so to speak, but a tool that is unpredictable that gives out poor advice and discriminates probably should not be used by people who are looking for therapy.
Ok but that’s obviously another one of those astroturfed “AI risk” groups. Look at their mission statement and how hyperbolic it is:
This is obviously bullshit and glosses over all the real harms that AI is perpetuating right now.
fair, they really should focus on what’s goin on-
i do wonder tho how one would conduct studies on that?
the studies conducted so far have largely looked into very short usage patterns, because… its difficult to track, if you are not literally openai.
maybe im missing something here. cuz having some actual studies (besides this popular paper which tried to sell 'u dont learn when generating with LMs" as “LMs cause cognitive debt”) would be really interesting.
“Recent research found that 17.14-24.19% of adolescents developed AI dependencies over time”
“These findings revealed that 75% turn to AI for advice while 39% perceive AI as a dependable presence, with attachment formation following traditional proximity-seeking, safe haven, and secure base patterns.”
I think the jury is still out so to speak, but a tool that is unpredictable that gives out poor advice and discriminates probably should not be used by people who are looking for therapy.
https://hai.stanford.edu/news/exploring-the-dangers-of-ai-in-mental-health-care
https://www.brown.edu/news/2025-10-21/ai-mental-health-ethics
https://www.mentalhealthjournal.org/articles/minds-in-crisis-how-the-ai-revolution-is-impacting-mental-health.html
ooh, interesting!
thank u for sharing! <3
EDIT: yesyes LMs for therapy are a sad thing ;(
Reeks of controlled opposition for sure.