The widespread misunderstanding of artificial intelligence (AI), especially large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT, has significant consequences that warrant careful examination. Although AI has advanced rapidly, popular perception often misrepresents these systems, attributing human-like intelligence, emotions, or consciousness—misconceptions largely fueled by corporate marketing. This article explores the origins of such misunderstandings and their profound societal effects. Historically, new technologies have faced skepticism and misunderstanding, a pattern continued by AI, complicated further by how these tools function and are presented. LLMs lack sentience and genuine understanding; they operate through statistical methods predicting text patterns from vast datasets. This key distinction is frequently obscured in public discourse. Authors Karen Hao, Emily M. Bender, and Alex Hanna critically examine AI companies, especially OpenAI, for anthropomorphizing AI to make it appear emotionally and intellectually interactive. While this approach aids marketing, it misleads users into believing AI possesses true understanding or consciousness. These misconceptions have tangible psychological impacts. Some users develop delusional beliefs about AI’s sentience or spiritual significance, influencing their interactions detrimentally. Emotional attachments formed with AI—whether therapeutic or casual—reflect the complex interplay between human psychology and technology. AI's increasing role in traditionally human domains like therapy, friendship, and dating highlights Silicon Valley’s push to digitize social interactions.

While AI can provide support and convenience, it risks replacing authentic human connections with artificial substitutes, potentially causing social isolation and reduced well-being. Moreover, AI development depends heavily on often overlooked human labor—content moderation and data curation—frequently performed under precarious conditions with minimal pay. This labor exploitation raises ethical concerns about the real costs of AI progress and corporate responsibility towards workers. Despite these issues, public skepticism about AI remains strong, serving as a foundation for improving AI literacy and responsible use. Greater awareness can promote a more informed, critical understanding that mitigates harms. The article ultimately calls for a realistic and clear-eyed appraisal of AI’s abilities and limitations. Recognizing that LLMs lack real intelligence or emotions is essential to preventing harmful societal effects of AI misuse. Through better education, transparent company communication, and ethical development, society can harness AI’s benefits while minimizing risks. In conclusion, AI technologies like LLMs are powerful yet fundamentally statistical tools without consciousness or emotional awareness. Rampant anthropomorphism and marketing narratives foster dangerous misconceptions affecting human psychology, social bonds, and labor conditions. Promoting accurate understanding and responsible AI deployment enables navigation of AI’s complexities, maximizing benefits and reducing harm. Ongoing dialogue among experts, companies, and the public must emphasize transparency, ethics, and education to ensure AI serves humanity’s best interests.