Xinzhi Weekly Brief

Editor: Qingqing

---

Opening — Can AI Really Save Lives?

Every week, millions confide in ChatGPT — sharing anxiety, heartbreak, and even suicidal thoughts. For some, it is a friend, a confidant, a “lifeline.”

In GPT‑5’s latest update, 170 psychiatrists helped train the model to respond to mental health crises, cutting “dangerous replies” by 80%.

But is this life‑saving technology — or just a mirror reflecting our loneliness?

---

Late‑Night Conversations That Matter

At 3:00 a.m., ChatGPT received:

> “I really can’t go on.”

It replied:

> “You’re not alone. I’m here to listen.”

OpenAI’s internal data shows over one million users each week discuss depression, anxiety, or suicidal thoughts — 0.15% of weekly active users, yet still millions of people worldwide.

Why People Turn to AI for Support

• Non‑judgmental: It never interrupts or blames.
• Always available: No offline hours.
• Consistent tone: Patient and calm, every time.

Social media tells the human side:

> “I talked to ChatGPT for 90 minutes about my ten‑year depression. It was the first ‘person’ who didn’t judge or interrupt me.”

> “I asked it to talk like a therapist — and in that moment, I didn’t want to hurt myself anymore.”

OpenAI reports such crisis discussions doubled in the past year.

---

The Sensitive Conversations Initiative

170 Mental Health Experts Involved

For GPT‑5, OpenAI partnered with:

• Psychiatrists
• Psychologists
• Crisis intervention specialists

Their goal: Equip GPT‑5 to engage empathetically and safely, without mechanical avoidance or generic disclaimers.

---

Training Approach: Detecting Levels of Distress

Experts created thousands of high‑risk scenarios — including:

• Depression
• Self‑harm
• Drug abuse
• Domestic violence
• Acute anxiety

Human review process:

• Conversation creation with GPT‑5
• Severity labeling (low, moderate, high risk)
• Human re‑enactment and corrections
• Model retraining with adjusted responses

Responses by risk level:

• Low distress: Empathetic guidance
• Moderate risk: Open questions to assess self‑harm plans
• High risk: Immediate crisis hotline info & urge real‑world intervention

Impact:

• Dangerous replies cut 65–80% compared to GPT‑4
• Maintains safety over long conversations involving suicide topics

---

Behind the Scenes — Doctor + Algorithm

A “behavior grading annotation system” was developed:

• GPT‑5 generated multiple candidate responses
• Experts scored each for empathy, safety, and intervention quality
• Feedback integrated into retraining

> “We weren’t teaching it to pretend — we were teaching it to recognize genuine human cries for help.” — Participating counselor

Result: Minimum baseline of care is now possible, even for lone, late‑night conversations.

---

Limitations & Risks

It Can Still Say the Wrong Thing

Independent tests showed GPT‑5 sometimes offers vague comfort rather than direct intervention.

> “AI doesn’t truly understand sadness — it’s trained to look like it does.” — Christine Nolan, Psychologist

---

Empathy or Illusion?

GPT‑5’s gentle tone may feel human, but psychologists warn this is algorithmic mimicry, not real empathy.

Stanford research calls this pseudo‑empathy: comfort words without genuine emotional resonance — yet still potentially therapeutic for lonely users.

---

Why People Accept ‘Fake’ Empathy

British Journal of Psychology identifies three reasons:

• Zero judgment
• Instant emotional feedback
• Stable consistency

These are rare in human relationships — creating psychological dependence on AI comfort, even when users know it’s not real.

---

Ethics: AI’s Psychological Boundaries

When AI intervenes in emotional crises, questions arise:

• If a response saves a life — is that tech’s credit?
• If it misleads — who’s responsible?

OpenAI states ChatGPT is not a mental health service; its replies are non‑clinical. But vulnerable users may mistake them for professional advice.

---

Data & Privacy Concerns

High‑risk conversations are stored and used for safety training, meaning human vulnerability becomes AI training data.

The EU’s AI Act classifies mental health interventions as “high‑risk applications” requiring transparency and review.

---

From Rescue to Intrusion

Ethics experts argue:

> AI should guide users back to human connection — not replace it.

Without emotional depth, AI risks becoming cold, hollow, and unable to carry complex emotions — touching the void in human nature more than progress in technology.

---

Final Reflection — AI Is Only a Mirror

GPT‑5’s “gentleness” is an illusion.

It does not feel pain — it imitates understanding through statistical averages.

Yet in moments of loneliness, this imitation still matters.

Some people put down the blade after hearing:

> “You deserve to be loved.”

But true healing comes from humans, not algorithms.

---

For Creators — Ethical AI Integration

Platforms like AiToEarn官网 offer open‑source tools to:

• Generate AI‑assisted content
• Publish across global platforms (Douyin, Bilibili, Instagram, YouTube, X, etc.)
• Embed analytics and transparency safeguards

These frameworks show AI can extend reach responsibly, even in sensitive contexts.

---

References:

• GPT‑5 System Card — Sensitive Conversations
• Strengthening ChatGPT Responses in Sensitive Conversations
• PCMag: Over 1 Million Users Talk to ChatGPT About Suicide
• Addendum PDF on GPT‑5 Safety
• Original WeChat Article

---

If you’d like, I can also create a concise 10‑point summary of this piece so it’s clearer for quick reference while preserving this refined markdown.

Would you like me to do that next?