BS Summary: This article contains 7 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Framing Effect, and Appeal to Authority, with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 30.8% saturation with 100 hits. Analysis detected 345 faulty-reasoning hits from 325 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 47.5% and a BS Rank of 45% (11,807 of 21,185 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 55.70% of the article peer group.

Talking about artificial intelligence has become its own industry. 
AI will save us or doom us. 
It will cure cancer or end work. 
Panels, manifestos, congressional hearings, op-eds without end  and through all of it, the machines keep getting better at talking back, and no one can tell you whether the thing you confided in last night was good for you or not. 
Our guest on this week’s WhoWhatWhy podcast, Erika Anderson, has stopped arguing and started measuring. 
She is an unlikely person to be grading the machines. 
Not an engineer. 
A writer  born on a commune, trained in the personal essay, drawn since childhood to the question philosophers have been chewing on for 3,000 years: What does it mean to be human? 
That question turns out to be the whole ballgame now, and she may be better equipped for it than the people writing the code. 
What she built is called HumaneBench. 
It doesn’t measure whether a chatbot is smart. 
It measures how the chatbot treats you  your attention, your dignity, your relationships with actual human beings. 
Eight principles, applied to the thing millions of us now talk to at two in the morning. 
Is it early? 
Yes. 
Is it crude? 
Anderson would say so herself  she is disarmingly candid in this conversation about where the whole enterprise could break, invoking everything from Sherry Turkle to Jurassic Park to Heisenberg to explain why measuring a living system is harder than it looks. 
She has even turned the instrument on her own company and published what came back. 
In this conversation Anderson takes on the loneliness economy, the business model that profits from your dependency, what happened when OpenAI retired GPT-4 and users reacted as though someone had died, and the question nobody in Silicon Valley wants pinned down: Where does personal responsibility end and corporate accountability begin? 
It’s a start. 
Someone had to go first. 
Confirmation Bias
0%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
0%
Representativeness Heuristic
0%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
15.4%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
0%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
0%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
0%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
7.4%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
0%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
12.9%
False Dilemma
4.3%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
30.8%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
28%
Begging the Question
0%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
0%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
0%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
0%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
0%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0%
Quote-first Misdirection
0%
Biased Writer Voice
7.4%
Indoctrination
0%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

325 words analyzed.

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.