Dr. Christiane Grünloh
@cgruenloh.bsky.social
PhD in Human-Computer Interaction | Head of #UX at Nedap | she/her | Books - Nature - Vipassana | DE - NL - EN
Passionate about human-centered and value-sensitive #eHealth design that empowers people, improves healthcare and doesn’t destroy the planet.
Passionate about human-centered and value-sensitive #eHealth design that empowers people, improves healthcare and doesn’t destroy the planet.
“When you walk into a room it’s like the sun comes up.”
November 26, 2025 at 8:20 PM
“When you walk into a room it’s like the sun comes up.”
Reposted by Dr. Christiane Grünloh
I was once described as a ferrero rocher of a human being: tough spikey outside, sweet nougatey inside, with a dependable hazelnut center.
They were high, but I still treasure it.
They were high, but I still treasure it.
October 24, 2025 at 1:26 AM
I was once described as a ferrero rocher of a human being: tough spikey outside, sweet nougatey inside, with a dependable hazelnut center.
They were high, but I still treasure it.
They were high, but I still treasure it.
Reposted by Dr. Christiane Grünloh
It's unbelievable that people fall for LLMs sentience. I was just talking to my calculator about it while it offered opinions about my math questions.
November 26, 2025 at 6:54 PM
It's unbelievable that people fall for LLMs sentience. I was just talking to my calculator about it while it offered opinions about my math questions.
Reposted by Dr. Christiane Grünloh
Fast gets you two essential things: you get revenue sooner, and you get the feedback you need to ensure you’re building something the market actually wants.
“Move fast” doesn't mean: get low-quality buggy garbage out the door faster. That slows you down.
3/12
“Move fast” doesn't mean: get low-quality buggy garbage out the door faster. That slows you down.
3/12
November 22, 2025 at 5:31 PM
Fast gets you two essential things: you get revenue sooner, and you get the feedback you need to ensure you’re building something the market actually wants.
“Move fast” doesn't mean: get low-quality buggy garbage out the door faster. That slows you down.
3/12
“Move fast” doesn't mean: get low-quality buggy garbage out the door faster. That slows you down.
3/12
Reposted by Dr. Christiane Grünloh
Incredibly bad faith and silly comparison. Libraries are public, not-for-profit entities that don't steal the books that are in their stacks. They actually pay publishers for subscriptions in order to gain access.
November 19, 2025 at 6:47 PM
Incredibly bad faith and silly comparison. Libraries are public, not-for-profit entities that don't steal the books that are in their stacks. They actually pay publishers for subscriptions in order to gain access.
Reposted by Dr. Christiane Grünloh
These examples are from a recent mixed-methods study from MIT (arxiv.org/abs/2509.11391) that also found that "AI companionship rarely begins intentionally: 10.2% developed relationships unintentionally through productivity-focused interactions, while only 6.5% deliberately sought AI companions."
"My Boyfriend is AI": A Computational Analysis of Human-AI Companionship in Reddit's AI Community
The emergence of AI companion applications has created novel forms of intimate human-AI relationships, yet empirical research on these communities remains limited. We present the first large-scale com...
arxiv.org
November 16, 2025 at 5:23 AM
These examples are from a recent mixed-methods study from MIT (arxiv.org/abs/2509.11391) that also found that "AI companionship rarely begins intentionally: 10.2% developed relationships unintentionally through productivity-focused interactions, while only 6.5% deliberately sought AI companions."
Thanks for sharing the thread! (And reminding me to attend to my to-read-pile 📑, because it’s already on there 😅)
Different context yes. I merely wanted to add this because the court ruling shows that the claim „LLM don‘t copy/plagiarize, it’s generating from statistical models“ doesn’t hold.
Different context yes. I merely wanted to add this because the court ruling shows that the claim „LLM don‘t copy/plagiarize, it’s generating from statistical models“ doesn’t hold.
November 16, 2025 at 8:21 AM
Thanks for sharing the thread! (And reminding me to attend to my to-read-pile 📑, because it’s already on there 😅)
Different context yes. I merely wanted to add this because the court ruling shows that the claim „LLM don‘t copy/plagiarize, it’s generating from statistical models“ doesn’t hold.
Different context yes. I merely wanted to add this because the court ruling shows that the claim „LLM don‘t copy/plagiarize, it’s generating from statistical models“ doesn’t hold.
Reposted by Dr. Christiane Grünloh
Fifth, the equivocation of human-human & human-AI relationships; a slip that is so ubiquitous that most seem to ignore it, but it's harmful and even probably illegal or against codes of conduct in many settings that involve professional psychologists. See section 7: doi.org/10.31234/osf...
9/
9/
![These problematic beliefs exist on a spectrum, from the assumption that AI products can help in mental health (e.g. Dehbozorgi et al., 2025; Siddals et al., 2024; Wellcome, 2025) to the
assertion that a chatbot can be a therapist (Kilgore, 2025), which
is a regulated profession (e.g. European Federation of Psychologists’ Associations, 2025) with codes of ethics (e.g. American Psychological Association, 2017; British Psychological Society, 2021).
Proponents of these beliefs use the guise of labour shortages and
the global mental health crisis (Kaplan, 2024), as cover to deskill
(for an alarming case, see Budzyń et al., 2025; also Akingbola et
al., 2024; Lebovitz et al., 2021), contributing to the polycrises the
technology industry and their allies uniquely profit from (McConnell & Jacobs, 2025).
All AI, and indeed any technology in mental or other healthcare settings requires “keeping users safe [and this in turn] requires substantial input from clinicians and careful planning to
reduce risk.” (Abrams, 2025) This is key because it is not possible to keep people safe without a highly qualified human-in-theloop (Amironesei et al., 2021; El-Mhamdi et al., 2022; T. Liu et
al., 2025; Salecha et al., 2024; Sharma et al., 2025; Weidinger et al.,
2022) and even then the risk of deskilling is present (e.g. Budzyń
et al., 2025; recall section 4: Outsourcing Programming to Companies). Relatedly, and taking the example of the therapist-client
relationship, dehumanising parallels encoded in expressions such
as: “the country needs all the quality therapists we can get —
be they human or bot” (Riddle, 2025) cannot become normal
in our scientific discussions. No therapist under proper ethical
functioning would cause their client to be addicted to their therapy (Huntington, 2025) nor would they, as in the Replika example (The Luddite, 2024), introduce a sexual relationship between
them and their client (Pettit, 2024b). Any such suggestions to
use a chatbot as a therapist would go aga…](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:vsyj5jtayxcq5dw5mtja4xtb/bafkreigr3wk3yvqjp5vxuc3esobfssy64gnx2xhlkxe4ahac27gxlri6p4@jpeg)
October 4, 2025 at 6:32 AM
Fifth, the equivocation of human-human & human-AI relationships; a slip that is so ubiquitous that most seem to ignore it, but it's harmful and even probably illegal or against codes of conduct in many settings that involve professional psychologists. See section 7: doi.org/10.31234/osf...
9/
9/
The German court didn’t follow OpenAI‘s claim that users are responsible for generating the exact song lyrics
„The court found that the coincidental generation of text that happened to match the lyrics either exactly or in large part was not plausible.“
www.dw.com/en/openai-lo...
„The court found that the coincidental generation of text that happened to match the lyrics either exactly or in large part was not plausible.“
www.dw.com/en/openai-lo...
OpenAI loses song lyrics copyright case in German court – DW – 11/11/2025
OpenAI lost a copyright infringement case in a lower German court for using popular song lyrics in its ChatGPT language model without paying royalties.
www.dw.com
November 15, 2025 at 9:20 PM
The German court didn’t follow OpenAI‘s claim that users are responsible for generating the exact song lyrics
„The court found that the coincidental generation of text that happened to match the lyrics either exactly or in large part was not plausible.“
www.dw.com/en/openai-lo...
„The court found that the coincidental generation of text that happened to match the lyrics either exactly or in large part was not plausible.“
www.dw.com/en/openai-lo...
Reposted by Dr. Christiane Grünloh
