An AI Social Coach Is Teaching Empathy to People with Autism
-
You didn’t stop reading? Then it’s a bit weird that you’d think I don’t know autistic people have empathy, unless you decided to arbitrarily take the most bad faith reading you could’ve done. If that’s the case, I recommend taking breathers before posting so that you don’t do that.
it’s a bit weird that you’d think I don’t know autistic people have empathy
It’s a bit weird that you think that I think that, and not that I was suggesting that no one else needs it explained to them either.
-
I’ll be honest, I find the framing of the study offensive and I’m not sure if I have the words but I’ll try.
It’s less about this study comparing itself to no intervention instead, but the social & political context of AI being pushed as a way to make care giving more efficient while sacrificing quality.
I don’t personally find the framing offensive, but I’m not on the spectrum so I can’t speak to it from that perspective. My comment was less about the article and more about not offloading that work onto unsuspecting and unprepared people.
That being said, I’m not as anti-ai as maybe some other people might be when it comes to these kinds of tools. The study itself highlights the fact that not everyone has the resources to get the kind of high quality care they need and this might be an option. I agree that sacrificing quality for efficiency is bad, in my post history you can see I made that argument about ai myself, but realistically so many people can potentially benefit from this that would have no alternatives. Additionally, AI will only be getting better, and hopefully you’ve never had a bad experience with a professional, but I can speak from personal experience that quality varies drastically between individuals in the healthcare industry. If this is something that can be offered by public libraries or school systems, so that anyone with the need can take advantage, I think that would be a positive because we’re nowhere near universal physical healthcare, much less universal mental healthcare or actual social development training. I know people who cannot afford healthcare even though they have insurance, so if they were able to go to a specialized ai for an issue I would think it’s a net positive even if it’s not a real doctor. I know that ai is not there yet, and there’s a lot of political and social baggage there, but the reality is people need help and they need it now and they are not getting it. I don’t know how good this ai is, but if the alternative is telling people that are struggling and have no other options that they have to tough it out, I’m willing to at least entertain the idea. For what it’s worth, if I could snap my fingers and give everyone all the help and support they need and it excluded ai, I would choose that option, I just don’t have it. I also don’t know that LLMs really can do this successfully on a large scale, so I would need evidence of that before really supporting it, I just think it shouldn’t be written off completely if it’s showing promise.
-
it’s a bit weird that you’d think I don’t know autistic people have empathy
It’s a bit weird that you think that I think that, and not that I was suggesting that no one else needs it explained to them either.
I was suggesting that no one else needs it explained to them either.
You’d hope so! But alas, some idiots exist. And when a title like this appears, it becomes difficult to tell if such an idiot wrote it at first glance, and more to point, a title like that tends to create more idiots (and it’s also just kinda offensive). That’s why it’s important not to write headlines like this.
Sidenote: If you want people to not take things personally, avoid personal pronouns. “Is that something that you need explained?” → “Is that something that people need explained?” It makes a world of difference and I’m confident I’ve avoided several arguments that could’ve spawned from my own posts thanks to making that kind of change. Not foolproof, sure – we are on the internet – but it helps.
-
I was suggesting that no one else needs it explained to them either.
You’d hope so! But alas, some idiots exist. And when a title like this appears, it becomes difficult to tell if such an idiot wrote it at first glance, and more to point, a title like that tends to create more idiots (and it’s also just kinda offensive). That’s why it’s important not to write headlines like this.
Sidenote: If you want people to not take things personally, avoid personal pronouns. “Is that something that you need explained?” → “Is that something that people need explained?” It makes a world of difference and I’m confident I’ve avoided several arguments that could’ve spawned from my own posts thanks to making that kind of change. Not foolproof, sure – we are on the internet – but it helps.
avoid personal pronouns
You were the only one here suggesting this required an explanation.
Explaining this would be like explaining that women can dress themselves. It’s unnecessary and suggests the opposite.
-
avoid personal pronouns
You were the only one here suggesting this required an explanation.
Explaining this would be like explaining that women can dress themselves. It’s unnecessary and suggests the opposite.
You were the only one here suggesting this required an explanation.
Alright, I think you’re being deliberately antagonistic now. Bye!
-
it’s a bit weird that you’d think I don’t know autistic people have empathy
It’s a bit weird that you think that I think that, and not that I was suggesting that no one else needs it explained to them either.
Dude, you’re just being a contrarian dick
-
I don’t personally find the framing offensive, but I’m not on the spectrum so I can’t speak to it from that perspective. My comment was less about the article and more about not offloading that work onto unsuspecting and unprepared people.
That being said, I’m not as anti-ai as maybe some other people might be when it comes to these kinds of tools. The study itself highlights the fact that not everyone has the resources to get the kind of high quality care they need and this might be an option. I agree that sacrificing quality for efficiency is bad, in my post history you can see I made that argument about ai myself, but realistically so many people can potentially benefit from this that would have no alternatives. Additionally, AI will only be getting better, and hopefully you’ve never had a bad experience with a professional, but I can speak from personal experience that quality varies drastically between individuals in the healthcare industry. If this is something that can be offered by public libraries or school systems, so that anyone with the need can take advantage, I think that would be a positive because we’re nowhere near universal physical healthcare, much less universal mental healthcare or actual social development training. I know people who cannot afford healthcare even though they have insurance, so if they were able to go to a specialized ai for an issue I would think it’s a net positive even if it’s not a real doctor. I know that ai is not there yet, and there’s a lot of political and social baggage there, but the reality is people need help and they need it now and they are not getting it. I don’t know how good this ai is, but if the alternative is telling people that are struggling and have no other options that they have to tough it out, I’m willing to at least entertain the idea. For what it’s worth, if I could snap my fingers and give everyone all the help and support they need and it excluded ai, I would choose that option, I just don’t have it. I also don’t know that LLMs really can do this successfully on a large scale, so I would need evidence of that before really supporting it, I just think it shouldn’t be written off completely if it’s showing promise.
Additionally, AI will only be getting better,
It might get cheaper, but that doesn’t mean it’s doing a better job.
if the alternative is telling people that are struggling and have no other options that they have to tough it out
That’s just it, if you’re talking to someone who’s is struggling with this there is already a better option: showing empathy. I suspect our perceived lack of empathy is a reflection of how society treats people in general, we are just more honest about it and recognize it’s mostly platitudes.
-
Additionally, AI will only be getting better,
It might get cheaper, but that doesn’t mean it’s doing a better job.
if the alternative is telling people that are struggling and have no other options that they have to tough it out
That’s just it, if you’re talking to someone who’s is struggling with this there is already a better option: showing empathy. I suspect our perceived lack of empathy is a reflection of how society treats people in general, we are just more honest about it and recognize it’s mostly platitudes.
By getting better, I mean it will be improving on itself. I never meant to indicate that it will be better than a trained professional.
I agree that showing ND people empathy is the best path forward, but realistically being able to socially signal empathy is a life skill and lacking that skill really only damages their own prospects. It’d be great if it didn’t make people less likely to be employable or less able to build a robust support network, but unfortunately that’s the case. Yes, ASD differences are often a reflection of how society treats people, but a demonstration of empathy is not a platitude. It’s an important way NT and lots of ND connect. If you think that the expression of empathy is difficult for people with ASD because they are more honest, then I think you might be equating lack of empathy with difficulty expressing it. There’s nothing dishonest about saying “I’m sorry that happened to you” unless you are not sorry it happened. It might not be something you would normally verbally express, but if hearing about a bad thing happening to someone doesn’t make you feel for them, then the difficulty isn’t expressing empathy, it’s lacking it. Society certainly does a lot of things for bad or nonsensical reasons, but expressing empathy generally isn’t one of them.
-
Glad you brought up US politics here.
The terrible title makes it seem like autistic people do not experience empathy. I would say there is a ten to one disparity in the capacity for empathy autistic people hold versus the capacity for empathy people are willing to demonstrate readily toward autistic people. Somebody brings up Republicans and that bothers you, here’s a thought: are you sure your country has a conservative element that isn’t following behind where American conservatives are leading with their increasingly openly eliminationist actions?
Its like the fact that A LARGE SUPERPOWER run by IRRATIONAL NAZIS might come up in your day to day life as regards the rights and dignities of minorities as you use this PLANETARY INFORMATION NETWORK.
Ohhh feddit.uk. My friend your LABOR party is practically synonymous with our conservatives at this point.
-
By getting better, I mean it will be improving on itself. I never meant to indicate that it will be better than a trained professional.
I agree that showing ND people empathy is the best path forward, but realistically being able to socially signal empathy is a life skill and lacking that skill really only damages their own prospects. It’d be great if it didn’t make people less likely to be employable or less able to build a robust support network, but unfortunately that’s the case. Yes, ASD differences are often a reflection of how society treats people, but a demonstration of empathy is not a platitude. It’s an important way NT and lots of ND connect. If you think that the expression of empathy is difficult for people with ASD because they are more honest, then I think you might be equating lack of empathy with difficulty expressing it. There’s nothing dishonest about saying “I’m sorry that happened to you” unless you are not sorry it happened. It might not be something you would normally verbally express, but if hearing about a bad thing happening to someone doesn’t make you feel for them, then the difficulty isn’t expressing empathy, it’s lacking it. Society certainly does a lot of things for bad or nonsensical reasons, but expressing empathy generally isn’t one of them.
Saying that you’re not worth the time for personal interactions but here’s a reason that’s okay is a platitude.
-
Saying that you’re not worth the time for personal interactions but here’s a reason that’s okay is a platitude.
I at no point said that anyone wasn’t worth the time for personal interaction. I said multiple times that my preferred solution would not involve having to resort to AI. That’s such a bad faith interpretation of my position that I can’t imagine this being productive at this point. Best of luck.
-
The terrible title makes it seem like autistic people do not experience empathy. I would say there is a ten to one disparity in the capacity for empathy autistic people hold versus the capacity for empathy people are willing to demonstrate readily toward autistic people. Somebody brings up Republicans and that bothers you, here’s a thought: are you sure your country has a conservative element that isn’t following behind where American conservatives are leading with their increasingly openly eliminationist actions?
Its like the fact that A LARGE SUPERPOWER run by IRRATIONAL NAZIS might come up in your day to day life as regards the rights and dignities of minorities as you use this PLANETARY INFORMATION NETWORK.
Ohhh feddit.uk. My friend your LABOR party is practically synonymous with our conservatives at this point.
I’m not from UK.
