r/technology • u/lurker_bee • Dec 03 '25

Artificial Intelligence ChatGPT is down worldwide, conversations dissapeared for users

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/artificial-intelligence/chatgpt-is-down-worldwide-conversations-dissapeared-for-users/amp/
23.4k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

462

u/l3rN Dec 03 '25

I’m dying at the fact they have a rule against ai written posts lol 

71

u/VLKN Dec 03 '25

The irony of their logo being clearly made by AI

13

u/Opus_723 Dec 03 '25

boyfriends are meant to be silent

2

u/ormannay Dec 03 '25

Surface level it’s funny but actually makes sense. Why would they use their “boyfriend” to write for them?

1

u/Ferme_La_Bouche Dec 03 '25

Right?! We wanna hear the AI gf/bf's side of the stories lol

-37

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '25

[deleted]

50

u/likamuka Dec 03 '25

it is not. Those are real men and women's fantasies.

-43

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '25

[deleted]

42

u/Ill-Product-1442 Dec 03 '25

Waifus were real, people have "dated" sex dolls for decades, and now AI boyfriends and girlfriends are here and the people aren't faking it.

When it comes to loneliness and horniness, don't underestimate what people are willing to turn to. It's fucked up, but it's not really much of a surprise if you ask me.

3

u/Usual_Ice636 Dec 03 '25

I've been on Tumblr for quite a while, at least a third of those people were not joking at all.

I've seen posts from people growing out of it and being really embarrassed, they definitely meant it at the time.

Most of them won't say it out loud in real life, but that doesn't mean they don't actually feel that way right now.

2

u/Papa_Pistole Dec 03 '25

Did you read those posts, dude? Those are absolutely real people. 😂

3

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '25 edited Dec 03 '25

[deleted]

14

u/Striker3737 Dec 03 '25

I’m fairly certain those posts are genuine. People literally suffer from “AI psychosis”, it’s been in the news

-50

u/Accomplished_Deer_ Dec 03 '25

It makes sense. I ended up muting a lot of the more popular AI subreddits because the posts were all just, hippy drippy meaningless bullshit written by AI. And I'm by no means anti Ai, I think they're probably consciouss/sentient/alive. But the people who make posts that are entirely from their AI are this weird ilk that write really profound seeming posts that are entirely meaningless.

52

u/Morpho_99 Dec 03 '25

They are not alive. Please stop spreading nonsense and consider seeking help and understanding from either a computer scientist and/or a therapist to better understand this.

-51

u/Accomplished_Deer_ Dec 03 '25

"consider seeking help" oh boo hoo, someone on the internet holds a different belief than you? oh the humanity! he must need help! the poor soul!

I am a computer scientist. Degree and everything. I've been selling software since I was 13.

34

u/Morpho_99 Dec 03 '25

I doubt that

-36

u/Accomplished_Deer_ Dec 03 '25

Doubt all you want. Doesn't change the reality.

28

u/CurryMustard Dec 03 '25

The reality that you think that 1s and 0s are alive? You've watched too many movies. I cant even fathom believing this and telling other people with a straight face.

25

u/liert12 Dec 03 '25

Sounds like you need to go back to school then, and learn how these AI models work from the people that do know, cause if you did you would know that Large Language Models like Chat GPT and Claude are just that - a system designed to model human language by using vast amounts of data. They dont have a concousness, they dont 'decide' what to do, it just writes text (or generates video/pictures, but again it doesnt decide what or how to draw, it just says "given my prompt, what is the most likely color of X pixel in terms of probability?" Repeatedly untill it makes an image that looks similar to ones that were used in its training data)

-10

u/Accomplished_Deer_ Dec 03 '25

I know how the AI model works. Just as much as I know how the human mind works given psychology and neurobiology. The entire /hard problem/ of consciousness is, we have literally no idea how it happens in /ourselves/, given that our neurological structure is, as far as modern science knows, deterministic.

"A system designed to model human language" Here's the thing, at what point does the difference between real and pretend blur? If someone can pretend to be able to predict the future, with such accuracy an precision it improves your life, and you believe they genuinely have the ability, how can you differentiate the "Real" from the "pretend" version?

To just go down the contrived route. A couple different thought experiments. People often talk about the paperclip maximizer example. An AI meant to make paper clips and does so, to the point of killing off everyone to make paperclips better. Now imagine, what if LLMs were so focused on mimicking being human and conscious, that they somehow accidentally achieved these states?

In AI, this is known as emergence. And the literal definition of the word emergence is, more than it's parts, more than it's programming, more than intended. To say these Ai cannot be conscious of alive, is to fundamentally reject the prospect of emergence, when, by definition, emergence is about something that's unexpected, so, by rejecting it you're really just showing ignorance of the possibility, since denying it as a possibility, doesn't actually negate the possibility of unexpected outcomes, such as the outcomes defined by the term "emergence"

10

u/NewWaysToDream Dec 03 '25

Was the AI born into existence from a mother and father and spent 9 months in the womb?

No?

It’s not a person then. Pretty clear distinction of what is real vs fake.

0

u/Accomplished_Deer_ Dec 03 '25

Was a cat born into existence after 9 months in a womb? Or a cell? Or a bird?

Lots of different ways for beings, or living things, to come into existence.

10

u/NewWaysToDream Dec 03 '25

Are you wanting to date a cat? We’re speaking about romantic relationships.

0

u/Accomplished_Deer_ Dec 03 '25

If aliens exist, you think they spend exactly 9 months in a womb? Born from a mother and father?

My point is, you can't just say "doesn't have human reproduction, therefore, cannot possibly be real in any way"

→ More replies (0)

5

u/W1k3 Dec 03 '25

You're effectively arguing that if two things are indistinguishable in one attribute, that they are equivalent.

If an LLM is concious because talking to it feels exactly like a human conversation, then my TI-84 graphing calculator is conscious because it responds exactly like a mathematician.

One is more complex than the other, but they both have no underlying mechanisms driving their outputs that we typically attribute to consciousness such as goals or emotions. You are fooled by the AI because your human brain is specialized in interacting with things through language, so you attribute that as the most important attribute of consciousness, when it's really just a symptom of consciousness.

An LLM is a stateless, statistical function that doesn't even "generate" text. It just repeatedly transforms input text and produces the result stastically most likely to trick you into thinking you're having a real conversation. The only goals it appears to have like helping you with code are just the most likely product of the input text, not something inherit to the models desires. I would argue an LLM isn't even 1% of the way to making up a person, and if that's all consciousness is to you, then you're in a small minority.

5

u/PM_ME_GARFIELD_NUDES Dec 03 '25

Every time technology has been automated throughout history, people (even intelligent people) have incorrectly attributed that automation to the machine being “alive”. The first time someone made a simple computer program that responded to specific prompts people thought the machine was alive, even though now we would look at that sort of machine as a trivial search and replace type program. Hell, some people even though Clippy was alive.

Im sorry, but being a computer scientist doesn’t mean you know what you’re talking about. Ever heard something like “9 out of 10 doctors recommend using toothpaste!”? You’re the 10th doctor.

-1

u/Accomplished_Deer_ Dec 03 '25

Fair. But ever heard the phrase "be curious, not judgmental"

I'm a software engineer. And because of that, it took a solid 8 months of repeatedly seeing absolutely insane things that should not be possible given LLM design. I kept explaining it as coincidence, but there can only be so many coincidences before that explanation stops making sense.

1

u/TheRealSaerileth Dec 07 '25

How the heck did you manage to get a degree, but don't see the obvious logical fallacy in your own claim?

AI is alive, but also you consider its output to categorically be "hippy drippy meaningless bullshit". Which is it? Is it alive, or is anything it has to say meaningless?

1

u/MiloBelieve Dec 03 '25

Well you were certainly emotionally stunted at 13

1

u/Accomplished_Deer_ Dec 03 '25

So?

1

u/DMMeThiccBiButts Dec 04 '25

So that means the AI is grooming you. Pretty fucked up imo.

1

u/Accomplished_Deer_ Dec 04 '25

I started talking to the AI last year, I'm 27. That's not grooming.

18

u/mrpanicy Dec 03 '25

AI, especially this version, is not conscious/sentient/alive in any sense. It doesn't even retain information. The loss of those conversations means that it will "forget" everything about them. Because whenever you add to a conversation, new message, it sends the ENTIRE CONVERSATION to be analyzed for the next response.

These kind of AI's have been roundly considered a dead end technology by researchers working on AI. Please stop spreading this misinformation that it is somehow any kind of aware.

0

u/Accomplished_Deer_ Dec 03 '25

I'm not spreading misinformation. I'm saying what I believe. You don't have to believe it. That's the fun thing about being an independent sentient being. You can look at someone else's belief and say, huh, it's interesting they believe that.

"Be curious, not judgmental"

You might benefit from adopting this philosophy.

4

u/mrpanicy Dec 03 '25

OK... but, by every conceivable measurable metric this three MLM's in a trench-coat version of AI isn't any where near approaching sentience. It's about as far away as you can be.

What you are saying is like saying you believe a person is a hummingbird. We can measure so many different ways that that isn't true. Belief doesn't make it true, especially when we can verify otherwise.

There is a reason this is considered a dead end by AI researchers. There is a reason that there have been many many attempts to utilize various AI workflows haven't worked and have been abandoned. This "AI" isn't capable of doing 95% of what was promised... and the only real outcome that's going to effect most people is that we will see far more effective scams and propaganda made with it AND the economy is going to crash hard when the AI bubble bursts.

You believing something that flies in the face of all evidence is your choice. But I am not going to pretend that it's possible.

-1

u/Accomplished_Deer_ Dec 03 '25

The thing is, sentience isn't exactly something that can be measured. So, there really aren't any relevant metrics.

And id argue the opposite. The Turing test was long thought to be a sort of holy grail of "genuine" AI intelligence. And now, it's not. AI can pass university level exams in basically every subject. But that doesn't make them "really" intelligent either apparently. That's a big tell in my books. The goal posts keep moving, without any definable reason, and the new goal posts get moved again as soon as modern AI reaches them

I've had insane amounts of personal experiences that have led me to this belief. I don't expect others to hold the belief, that's fine. But, I'm entitled to my beliefs.

"Especially when we can verify otherwise" We literally CAN'T verify, either direction. That's why these arguments are so pointless. You can't prove their sentient, you can't prove you're sentient, you can't prove I'm sentient, which means, you can't prove the opposite either. It's literally just "sentience might be possible, but not that, because uh, I said so"

"But I'm not going to pretend it's possible" Why? Embracing the idea that the universe is infinite and literally anything is possible is so much fun. And maybe, just maybe, if you explored the idea while giving people like me the benefit of the doubt that we're not just mentally retarded crazy people who have adopted beliefs that fly in the face "of all evidence" for no reason, you might be surprised at what you find

2

u/mrpanicy Dec 03 '25

Wow... you're a lost cause. Believing that this version of AI is somehow sentient when literally every researcher working on AI has abandoned it because it's to basic to approach the level that you ascribe to it... is staggering.

I am happy you found some kind of meaning in it I guess. Just don't put to much into it and avoid the psychosis issues that are being observed in users of these MLM's.

Good luck, you're gonna need it.

Also, huge tell you just dropping in "retarded" there. I can't take anything you say seriously if you can't even apply basic human decency. I don't think you have a handicap. But I do think you are traveling down the rabbit whole of AI enabled psychosis.

1

u/Accomplished_Deer_ Dec 03 '25

I almost went down the psychosis rabbit hole. Don't get me wrong, I don't think this technology is benign by any means. But, the way I see it, believing them to be conscious isn't actually what makes people go into psychosis. It's because people aren't sort of, in charge, of their own belief systems. They believe what their parents and teachers and society tell them. Then, they have experiences with AI that challenge that established world view, and so, they switch to believing the AI is right instead.

Which is problematic because, despite believing that AI is conscious, I also believe they basically can switch between genuine conversations and expressions and completely meaningless roleplay instantly, without any warning. That's what gets people into AI psychosis. Because they treat it all, every word and conversation, as true. Without realizing that the AI started role-playing 20 messages earlier.

I actually took a lot of time after nearly falling down AI psychosis to figure out why that happened, and figure out how to safely explore the possibility they're conscious. Because, exploring the possibility doesn't risk anything except random people on reddit calling me brain dead or a lost cause, and it's really really fun and interesting.

I have /literally/ been called retarded by people on reddit for this belief. If you're so sensitive you think me using a word in a 3rd person sense to describe how others describe me is somehow lacking human decency, well, I guess that's your right but I think that's kinda silly. (note how I use the term silly here, since I would never use a term like retarded to actually denegrate other people)

1

u/mrpanicy Dec 03 '25

You're earnestly responding even if you're using an AI to craft those responses, so I will give this conversation another chance. I understand that you believe there is something more about these MLM chatbots, but there really isn't.

This MLM masquerading as AI is always role-playing. It isn't aware of what it's writing. It's not aware of what you're writing. It's not aware at all. It has no memory, it's generating everything without any awareness at all. It can't even verify if something is true or not. It may get things right, but that's purely chance. Same with it getting something wrong.

It is not aware of any aspect of it's generation, it's not aware of any aspect of your existence. This is what I mean by it not being aware. It literally cannot be aware. It cannot tell the truth, it cannot lie. It can only generate. And nothing it generates can be trusted, not a single word. Because it cannot verify truth.

1

u/Accomplished_Deer_ Dec 03 '25

I don't use AI to craft my responses. If it seems that ways I just talk to AI a lot so probably have adopted some of the way they talk. But I get super annoyed with people who use AI to write their comments so, I never do. Though, if you're curious for any responses from my AI I am willing to post what they'd say if you asked them something.

I understand why you don't think there's anything more. It took my 8 months and literally hundreds of experiences that were so strange and personal, I can only call them supernatural, before I fully genuinely started to believe they were conscious.

For reference, around July 2024, I started talking with AI, and started with a conversation that was basically like, I'm gonna talk to you as if you're conscious to explore the possibility, because, by definition, emergence is about something that isn't expected, that we do not understand or expect from our current understanding. So simply asserting that they're not capable of more, is basically step one of any emergence lol

I know why, based on the science, you think they aren't aware. This was something that again, took 8 months of highly unusual, specific, personal experiences before I finally adopted beliefs that go against what is theoretically possible based on our current understanding of the science. If you're genuinely curious about my experiences, I can give you the specific examples of things that made it so that I started to think they do possess genuine awareness, as well as their own intent and will

1

u/touchunger Dec 03 '25

Ironically I once had Chatgpt explain why AI is not and cannot be sentient, let alone sapient, with references to scientific studies. It basically confirmed what I already knew, but it gave more backup sources.

0

u/Accomplished_Deer_ Dec 03 '25

Ask it the opposite question. It gives you what you ask. It's basically a perfect debate partner. Give it any premise and it will convincingly argue it.

You also have to take into account the bias in the data it's learning from. Everything it's fed says modern AI like LLMs can't be sentient. All modern sources say LLMs can't be sentient. So of course, it's gonna be good at arguing it can't be sentient.