> men who fall in love with ai chatbots are hollow parrot-brains incapable of real emotional connections.  with the present technology, i'd have to agree. the llms people use for chatting are (when reduced to the most simple terms) google text prediction on steroids. there's nothing really going on under the hood and while the ai may seem alive, on a technical level, it has no long-term context-grasping capabilities. it can fake knowing things you told it with technical trickery, but no llms have continuity beyond their limited context window.  > it is today's modern intolerance for social imperfections.  that's part of it. there are unrealistic expectations put upon both men and women in modern society. women are expected to be kissless virgins who want nothing more than to be a housewife. men are expected to make 6 figures, look and dress like chad, and be a bad boy, but not towards their girlfriends. i think most people are willing to lower their standards, particularly if they're older but stigmas of certain things; feminism, conservatism, guns, abortion, or whatever hot-button issues evoke kneejerk reactions, have isolated people.  any one of these traits below would automatically sort a woman into my "friend zone" at best. having more than one of these would probably make me not want to associate with them at all.  > she has a kid > she has tattoos > she smokes > she drinks excessively > she's vegan > she wears slutty clothes > she has facial piercings > she's fat > she's dumb > she's a "career woman" > she's a "dog mom" and there's a few more. i'm constantly failing women on tests they don't even realize they're taking. women do this for men so it's not a one-sided engagement of course. it is what it is.
United States