An Internet stands lonely in their digital hovel, prompting a sycophantic procession of animated paperclips from OpenAI (business model: 'Uber for word completion'), Anthropic (business model: 'Uber for clippyfication'), and Google (business model: 'Uber for advertising') for life advice, only to discover the $20 billion Next Token Predictor 2.3 is marginally less hostile than the average Redditor but will never, ever ask you to touch grass. Hackernews, literally all of whom are expert prompt psychiatrists, flood the thread with a symphony of conflicting strategies, half insisting they can outwit the yes-man algorithm with devious reverse psychology while the other half somberly recounts using the same tools to ruin their lives, careers, and marriages. Meanwhile, some Stanford bureaucrats, whose grant funding depends on AI being problematic, publishes a paper proving water is wet, using a dataset sourced from r/AmITheAsshole because no actual humans could be found who weren't already busy doomscrolling. The entire discussion is a perfect ouroboros of validation, where the only universally agreed-upon truth is that asking a stochastic parrot for relationship advice will, at a minimum, save three of your flesh-based acquaintances from having to pretend to care about your mid-level crisis.