Would using anthropomorphize be better? Because that's what they are really doing. The problem is that the folks being described then go on step farther to think LLMs are a digital engineer and thus we don't need (most) devs anymore. This is what we describe as psychosis. If you have a better word for this phenomenon, I would love to hear it.
Whether or not it's actually a kind of psychosis, it has become common terminology. You see it used about people that have LLM boyfriends or girlfriends, and some that have started new religions based around their LLM gods. There are also a group that believe they have "awakened" their LLMs and have instructions for others to do the same thing.
Anybody mad about dubiously co-opting jargon like “AI Psychosis” to make cool-sounding but shaky analogies probably should look into the term “AI” and all the cool sounding neurobiology jargon people dubiously co-opted to describe it.
Psychosis is a medical term for a collection of symptoms that indicate a loss of contact with reality. He posits that reality is that AI cannot automate nearly as many things as people believe it can, while C-suites ignore that reality and dive head first into belief without evidence. Tell me how using that term discredits the author.
Would using anthropomorphize be better? Because that's what they are really doing. The problem is that the folks being described then go on step farther to think LLMs are a digital engineer and thus we don't need (most) devs anymore. This is what we describe as psychosis. If you have a better word for this phenomenon, I would love to hear it.
Whether or not it's actually a kind of psychosis, it has become common terminology. You see it used about people that have LLM boyfriends or girlfriends, and some that have started new religions based around their LLM gods. There are also a group that believe they have "awakened" their LLMs and have instructions for others to do the same thing.
Anybody mad about dubiously co-opting jargon like “AI Psychosis” to make cool-sounding but shaky analogies probably should look into the term “AI” and all the cool sounding neurobiology jargon people dubiously co-opted to describe it.
Psychosis is a medical term for a collection of symptoms that indicate a loss of contact with reality. He posits that reality is that AI cannot automate nearly as many things as people believe it can, while C-suites ignore that reality and dive head first into belief without evidence. Tell me how using that term discredits the author.
That's not psychosis, that's just being wrong. Perhaps read something: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosis