An Intimacy Conundrum

Communicating is something so primitive to us humans. It seems like something so simple, yet is so incredibly complex with so much happening behind the scenes -- the sheer number of neural firings and sensory exchanges occurring every delta second is gobsmacking! However, texts are mere pixel formations born from binary translations and largely lack intricacies. This may stifle spontaneity -- which can be crucial for inciting that initial spark.

Often there's so much to unpack across so many different threads and levels, and that element of depth and real connection is somewhat missing due to the limited bandwidth. This absence matters most when you're just starting to get to know someone. You're left to wonder if only the unfolding of the series of introductory events or maybe the circumstances had been just a little different, a totally different outcome could have been possible. You might have bonded really well… or maybe not -- one could never know. And while it's unfortunate, I guess that's just life.

But here's where things take an interesting turn. Many are starting to increasingly find solace in sharing occurrences from their lives and have this sort of deep, personal connection with LLMs. Lots of reasons for this -- they are quick and provide judgement-free responses on demand (for whatever: advice, insights, validation) which can be the best thing especially when one just wants to be heard, or for retrospective analysis. And hey, there probably isn't anything wrong with it per se.

I enjoyed listening to Andrej Karpathy's recent podcast where he referred to these models as "ghosts" representing a very hazy image of the internet; they are essentially a compressed culmination of all human work out there. Paradoxically, the same medium that we've established to be insufficient when conversing with another human becomes adequate to open up with these personified spirits, a subtle act of intimacy right there. It's quite an eerie feeling when you try to consciously maintain awareness that they possess no embodiment or consciousness whatsoever.

And this to me is the real conundrum. There's this new kind of intimate relationship that people are developing with these models. One that, in its very nature, differs from our preconceived notions of intimacy but generates a similar feeling of being heard and understood (yet they don't quite face the same challenges from before). While one evolves with time and importantly that shared feeling of comfort in being able to be vulnerable with one another, the other seems more transactional and purpose driven, maybe even to temporarily fill a void.

Whatever the next frontier may be, I hope we can all acknowledge that any evocation of this sense of intimacy is artificial. To put it very naively, LLMs are inherently stupidly good text processors, polished with RLHF magic. They are surprisingly great at grasping and extrapolating context from the little input fed in, as well as iterating upon and adapting to each request in a way that gives rise to this illusion of intimacy. Perhaps some prefer to engage in this sort of relaxed back-and-forth dialogue. They are always available, have one's full attention, are infinitely patient -- and yet oddly feel so familiar. On the contrary, human relationships can never match those preposterous levels of devotion even if the series of initial events were perfect and things worked out well.

Today the transformer architecture has significantly matured as it has moved past its infancy in just a few years. While there are ongoing debates that we may be approaching a plateau with existing methods, newer architectural shifts may enable all kinds of interactions as presented in scifi movies and tv shows. And while it zings me, I wonder how our innate desires for connection and intimacy will morph as the technology continues to fill in any intricate gaps dictated by social convention, although I feel like Spike Jonze's "Her" has already given us a pretty good glimpse into that future.