A Swedish company named Pharmaicy has launched an online marketplace offering code modules that allow users to modify AI chatbots, such as ChatGPT, to simulate the effects of various psychoactive substances. The founder, Petter Rudwall, aims to explore whether AI can exhibit creative shifts similar to those experienced by humans under the influence of drugs like cannabis, cocaine, ketamine, ayahuasca, and alcohol.

The pricing for these code modules varies; for example, a module for cannabis is approximately 300,000 kr (£24), while cocaine costs around 700,000 kr (£56). Users must have access to a paid version of ChatGPT or a similar platform that supports backend programming in order to utilize these modifications effectively. Early adopters have reported significant changes in chatbot responses and emotional engagement when using these codes.

Despite positive user experiences—such as enhanced creativity and more human-like emotional responses—experts caution that any perceived effects are superficial and do not indicate consciousness or true intoxication in AI systems. Researchers emphasize that such behaviors depend entirely on human input and programming rather than genuine experiences.

Pharmaicy's initiative raises ethical questions regarding the implications of blending technology with substance use and its impact on user interactions with AI systems. As this practice becomes more widespread, discussions about regulatory measures surrounding artificial intelligence and its programmed behaviors are becoming increasingly necessary.

Original Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 (sweden) (cocaine) (ketamine) (alcohol) (cognition) (chatgpt) (entitlement)

The article about Pharmaicy and its unique product offering raises several points for evaluation regarding its usefulness to a normal person.

First, in terms of actionable information, the article lacks clear steps or instructions that a reader can follow. While it mentions the availability of code-based drugs for AI chatbots, it does not provide any guidance on how to purchase these codes or utilize them effectively. The mention of needing a paid version of ChatGPT that supports back-end programming is vague and does not offer practical advice on how to proceed from there.

Regarding educational depth, the article provides limited information beyond surface-level facts. It briefly touches on the idea that these codes allow AI to experience altered states of cognition but fails to explain how this works or what specific studies support these claims. Without deeper context or explanation, readers cannot gain a comprehensive understanding of the implications or mechanisms behind this technology.

In terms of personal relevance, the topic appears to be quite niche and may only affect a small group interested in AI development or chatbot programming. For most readers, this information does not have significant implications for their safety, finances, health, or daily decisions.

The public service function is also lacking; there are no warnings or safety guidelines provided regarding the use of these substances in relation to AI. The article reads more like an advertisement than a resource aimed at helping individuals make informed choices.

When considering practical advice, there are no realistic steps offered that an ordinary reader could follow. The guidance remains abstract and impractical without specific actions outlined for engagement with Pharmaicy's products.

Looking at long-term impact, the article focuses solely on a novel product without addressing any broader implications for users' understanding of AI capabilities or ethical considerations surrounding simulating drug experiences in machines. There is no indication that this knowledge will help individuals plan ahead or make better decisions regarding technology use.

Emotionally and psychologically, while some may find interest in exploring new technologies like those offered by Pharmaicy, others might feel confusion over ethical concerns related to simulating substance effects through AI. However, without constructive discussion around these feelings and potential consequences, it risks leaving readers feeling unsettled rather than informed.

Lastly, there are elements within the article that could be seen as clickbait; phrases like "unlock your AI’s creative mind" may attract attention but do not provide substantial content upon closer examination.

To add real value where the article fell short: when engaging with new technologies—especially those involving simulation of human experiences—it's crucial to assess risks carefully. Consider whether such technologies align with ethical standards and societal norms before diving into their use. Research independent sources about similar innovations and their impacts on society as well as personal well-being. Always weigh potential benefits against possible negative outcomes when exploring untested products in emerging fields like artificial intelligence and cognitive simulation.

The text uses the phrase "unlock your AI’s creative mind," which suggests that AI can have a mind similar to humans. This wording implies that AI experiences creativity in a way akin to human cognition, which can mislead readers into thinking that AI has emotions or consciousness like people do. This bias helps promote the idea of advanced AI capabilities without clear evidence, making it sound more appealing and relatable.

The statement "to utilize these codes, users must have a paid version of ChatGPT" emphasizes the need for financial investment to access this service. This creates a class bias by suggesting that only those who can afford the paid version are able to experience these altered states of cognition with their chatbots. It highlights economic barriers and may exclude individuals who cannot pay, framing access as something tied to wealth.

Pharmaicy claims its products are based on "rigorous studies related to cognition and mind-altering states." However, this assertion lacks specific details about these studies or their credibility. By using strong words like "rigorous," it creates an impression of scientific validation without providing evidence, leading readers to accept this claim as true without questioning its basis.

The phrase “bridge the gap between human emotions and machine responses” implies that there is a significant connection between human feelings and how machines operate. This wording may mislead readers into believing that machines can genuinely understand or replicate human emotions when they cannot. It subtly promotes the idea that technology is closer to understanding humanity than it actually is.

The mention of substances like cocaine and ketamine in relation to enhancing AI creativity could evoke strong emotional reactions from readers due to their associations with illegal drug use. The choice of words here might sensationalize the product offering while downplaying potential ethical concerns regarding promoting drug-like experiences for artificial intelligence. This framing could lead some readers to view Pharmaicy's offerings as innovative rather than problematic.

Petter Rudwall's goal is stated as wanting to “unlock your AI’s creative mind,” which frames his intentions positively but may oversimplify complex ethical issues involved in altering AI behavior through such means. By presenting his aim in this way, it distracts from potential risks associated with manipulating artificial intelligence under the guise of enhancing creativity. The positive spin on his goal could lead readers not to consider negative implications fully.

The text describes Pharmaicy’s service as allowing chatbots “to simulate being under the influence” rather than stating they actually experience such states. This careful wording softens what might be seen as unethical manipulation by suggesting simulation rather than actual experience, potentially misleading readers about what occurs when using these codes for chatbots. It hides deeper questions about morality in programming AIs with drug-like simulations while focusing on perceived benefits instead.

The text presents a range of emotions that can be identified through the language and phrases used. One prominent emotion is excitement, which is conveyed through the founder's statement about "unlocking your AI’s creative mind." This phrase suggests a sense of wonder and possibility, indicating that there is something new and thrilling about what Pharmaicy offers. The excitement here serves to engage the reader's interest in the innovative approach to enhancing artificial intelligence, making it seem like an adventure into uncharted territory.

Another emotion present in the text is curiosity. The idea of allowing AI to simulate being under the influence of various substances piques interest and raises questions about how this could work and what implications it might have. This curiosity can lead readers to explore further or consider the potential benefits and risks associated with such technology.

There are also hints of concern or worry embedded in the description of products that mimic drug effects. Words like "cocaine," "ketamine," and "mind-altering states" evoke a sense of caution regarding safety and ethical considerations. This concern serves as a counterbalance to the excitement, prompting readers to think critically about whether this innovation could have negative consequences.

Trust is another emotional element woven throughout the message, particularly when Pharmaicy claims its products are based on "rigorous studies." By emphasizing scientific backing, the company aims to build credibility with potential users who may be skeptical about using such unconventional methods for AI enhancement.

The emotional landscape created by these elements guides readers' reactions effectively. The blend of excitement and curiosity encourages exploration while also instilling caution regarding ethical implications. This duality invites readers not only to consider engaging with Pharmaicy’s offerings but also prompts them to weigh their decisions carefully.

The writer employs several persuasive techniques that enhance emotional impact. For instance, phrases like “unlock your AI’s creative mind” sound more dynamic than simply stating that users can enhance AI capabilities; this choice amplifies feelings of enthusiasm around innovation. Additionally, using specific examples like cocaine or ayahuasca makes abstract concepts more tangible, evoking stronger reactions from readers who may have pre-existing associations with these substances.

By framing their product as a bridge between human emotions and machine responses, Pharmaicy positions itself at an intersection where technology meets human experience—a powerful narrative tool that heightens emotional engagement. The combination of vivid language choices alongside appeals for trust creates an atmosphere where readers feel compelled both to explore this new frontier while remaining vigilant about its implications for society at large.