Conor Linehan
@conorlinehan.bsky.social
Researcher in Applied Psychology and Human Computer Interaction. University College Cork
Reposted by Conor Linehan
And I'll repeat this because why not.
This is really what companies want. They want us to be totally isolated from other people. And all our interactions to be mediated by their LLMs, in a way that literally edits and devalues what we know and say.
7/n
bsky.app/profile/oliv...
6/n
This is really what companies want. They want us to be totally isolated from other people. And all our interactions to be mediated by their LLMs, in a way that literally edits and devalues what we know and say.
7/n
bsky.app/profile/oliv...
6/n
Something I hinged on to get to this what I describe: the Marxian fetishisation of artefacts is so complete in the case of AI that not only do we somehow conclude machines think, but we accept for them to think, speak, draw instead of us, while also thinking these are (expressions of) our thoughts.
November 17, 2025 at 6:16 AM
And I'll repeat this because why not.
This is really what companies want. They want us to be totally isolated from other people. And all our interactions to be mediated by their LLMs, in a way that literally edits and devalues what we know and say.
7/n
bsky.app/profile/oliv...
6/n
This is really what companies want. They want us to be totally isolated from other people. And all our interactions to be mediated by their LLMs, in a way that literally edits and devalues what we know and say.
7/n
bsky.app/profile/oliv...
6/n
Reposted by Conor Linehan
Reposted by Conor Linehan
I’ve already said so and phones aren’t the problem here.
The problem is companies offering sycophantic human simulator software that is objectively harmful and is not controllable—something that’s somewhere between religion and drug, for profit.
The problem is companies offering sycophantic human simulator software that is objectively harmful and is not controllable—something that’s somewhere between religion and drug, for profit.
November 15, 2025 at 12:11 PM
I’ve already said so and phones aren’t the problem here.
The problem is companies offering sycophantic human simulator software that is objectively harmful and is not controllable—something that’s somewhere between religion and drug, for profit.
The problem is companies offering sycophantic human simulator software that is objectively harmful and is not controllable—something that’s somewhere between religion and drug, for profit.
Reposted by Conor Linehan
Chat interfaces that mimic human beings should be illegal.
Organizations who use works they have no license to should be shut down.
It’s pretty simple.
Organizations who use works they have no license to should be shut down.
It’s pretty simple.
November 15, 2025 at 12:22 PM
Chat interfaces that mimic human beings should be illegal.
Organizations who use works they have no license to should be shut down.
It’s pretty simple.
Organizations who use works they have no license to should be shut down.
It’s pretty simple.
Reposted by Conor Linehan
Sign here bsky.app/profile/kris...
AI hype letter remains open for more signatures tinyurl.com/Sign-Letter-...
CryptPad
tinyurl.com
November 11, 2025 at 6:36 AM
Sign here bsky.app/profile/kris...
Reposted by Conor Linehan
yes, really messed up stuff, see thus by me and @irisvanrooij.bsky.social (2025). Critical Artificial Intelligence Literacy for Psychologists. doi.org/10.31234/osf...
and: bsky.app/profile/oliv...
and: bsky.app/profile/oliv...
![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 against professional codes
of conduct and possibly the law (e.g. Abraham, 2002; American
Psychological Association, 2017; Belanger, 2025; British Psychological Society, 2021; Cole, 2025; Illinois Department of Financial
and Professional Regulation, 2025; Mental health Foundation,
2022).
Finally, as scientists we have to analyse situations carefully, so](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:vsyj5jtayxcq5dw5mtja4xtb/bafkreidaj5awuicczysnxja7pzwl6ztw22uziz2hzy2swqwgpzitl5ucei@jpeg)
October 28, 2025 at 7:45 AM
yes, really messed up stuff, see thus by me and @irisvanrooij.bsky.social (2025). Critical Artificial Intelligence Literacy for Psychologists. doi.org/10.31234/osf...
and: bsky.app/profile/oliv...
and: bsky.app/profile/oliv...
Reposted by Conor Linehan
People treat it like there’s some kind of competition for who’s been victimized the most and not a collaboration to make sure we’re all victimized as little as possible
October 13, 2025 at 12:29 AM
People treat it like there’s some kind of competition for who’s been victimized the most and not a collaboration to make sure we’re all victimized as little as possible