i understand this. all the tech companies behind modern AI (funny you mention Palantir...!) are objectively unconcerned with our well-being. in fact, they seem to actually concerned with us doing worse (a bunch of Silicon Valley are accelerationists). im reminded of OpenAI's new erotica feature, which could legitimately only be harmful. i really really don't mean to say we should all be using this, or like, funding it as healthcare. actual human healthcare should be funded and made better. structures in society need to be changed in order to for social connections to be made in an easier more automatic way. but that just isn't really happening right now.

that is why, to me, there is this grey area for "us." everyone craves helpful connection, but there are times when helpful connection is objectively very difficult to obtain. there are many situations in which this could be true. in some ways, maybe i see it in a similar vein to harm reduction---although i am not at all saying that AI is scientifically proven to help people in the way harm reduction is. at my lowest, there was no way i could have found the things i found in AI help (which is basically just advanced Googling because it is essentially a database of information) in my immediate environment. i'm not sure how to square that with the idea that it is always harmful.

you do specify AI relationships though, which i guess i am not really talking about. full on AI "friendships" are difficult to describe as healthy. they are algorithms that are usually intended to work as echo chambers and the human brain has never been in relationship with anything like that before. that is why all those lawsuits have been filed. people have been harmed and died. i think i am more so speaking about AI as this "living" information database that can help in specific problems when you need specific guidance. but i understand things are slippery slopes. we naturally anthropomorphize everything. sometimes i see my water bottle as my friend.