exocrinous

You presented with the same visible symptoms, but we don't know if your illness had the same amount of resistance to treatment

Yeah I don't think the manipulative piece of spyware is actually friends with him. It's a robot that tells lies. Abandoning a friend is just how his amygdala and other primitive parts of his brain process his behaviour. The way he's feeling is a normal way for a sack of thinking meat to feel. It's not good, but it's not like we can act like his behaviour is abnormal. If we say his case is a freak occurrence and no normal person would fall for this, then the risk we run is that when the technology improves, a lot of other normal people are gonna fall for this and we won't have been prepared. This technology is designed specifically to prey on blind spots common to most males of the species. I don't think we should use language that inclines us to underestimate the dangers. We need to understand how the hindbrain processes the stimulus this technology creates if we want to understand the dangers. We're gonna need to make an effort to see the world through OP's eyes so we can see why it works. Because I guarantee the dangerous companies developing this tech are researching OP's perspective to improve their product.

That's just the plot of Infinity Train.

"Pretentious" is just a dogwhistle for "neurodivergent". Never worry about being pretentious.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/k-pop-star-issues-apology-to-upset-fans-for-having-a-boyfriend-92d7v99l7

Addiction is an abnormal and unhealthy breakdown in the brain's reward mechanisms. Feeling bad for abandoning a friend is the behaviour of a normal and healthy brain. This isn't necessarily an addiction, it's just the bald monkey's brain acting like monkey brains tend to do, rather than being perfectly logical at all times.

I mean hell, humans pack bonded with fucking wild wolves and where did it get the species? It gave us dogs! Dogs are awesome! I bet this AI seems a lot more like a human to the monkey parts of our brains than a wild wolf does. For that matter, we pack bond with a cartoon image of a bear made from inanimate cotton. If a kid can genuinely love their teddy and that's normal, I don't think it's fair to say that a mentally well person can't fall in love with a machine. Now, that person may not be as cognitively developed as most adults, but that's also fairly normal.

I'm not saying it's a good thing to feel emotions for a manipulative piece of spyware. The action doesn't have healthy results. But what I'm saying is, the action in the post is not motivated by mental unhealth. The only things it's motivated by are normal human being emotions, and a poor sense of critical thinking.

All the things I listed fit your definition.

I disagree. I think anyone can do politics. According to your definition, 10,000 people blocking the streets for a rally isn't politics. A man self immolating in front of the supreme court isn't politics. A scientist appearing before the UN to talk about the dangers of climate change isn't politics. That's silly. It's also a circular definition, given a politician is defined as someone who does politics.

That was to save his life, wasn't it?

You're talking about cancer breakthroughs like they're not politics. Cancer breakthroughs are political. The allocation of resources towards particular kinds of research and its payoff is a contentious subject. The breakthrough serves to justify money that has been spent on cancer research. Although critics may say that there's too much focus on cancer research when other illnesses are more widespread and more pressing. And for that matter, should we be putting more effort into limiting carcinogens in the first place instead of researching cures? An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Maybe I'd prefer the government subsidize induction stoves so that I don't have to inhale carcinogenic stove fumes and later get my cancer cured in a hospital. That sure sounds like less stress for the patient, and it has the side benefit of improving climate change. Ultimately cancer breakthroughs are a deeply political subject, with a lot of different conflicting opinions on the subject.