They are acquaintances and friends, although not close friends. It's also unclear what their biases are since I can't read their minds, so there is no way of knowing if their biases are harmful for their lives. If I knew what their biases were, I would probably have had better understanding of what the output meant to them; hence the conclusion that we do not share the same biases.

I see emotional intelligence as a tool, not some virtue to uphold. Here it is identifying the value of a relationship and avoiding potentially breaking that relationship apart simply because one aspect of it is not optimal. Not every relationship needs to have perfect alignment with my beliefs.

But more importantly, I don't have enough information about them to properly navigate a conversation about their use of the LLM for advice.

> I just really don't like the idea of pretending or lying to people with their whole lives ahead and going counter to what you believe to be the truth for some social comfort or emotional intelligence aspect.

Fine, but you're also doing that for your own comfort, and not necessarily for the benefit of the other person. It can (and often does) cause the friendship to end before you've actually helped them understand what you want them to understand. I've lost friendships this way.

I'd rather keep the relationship intact and revisit the conversation when the time is right than risk abruptly ending the relationship with the same outcome where they go through their whole life with malformed or harmful ideas. You incorrectly assume that they would "know" the alternative views just by communicating, but much like their biases allowed them to "understand" the output of the LLM, their biases may disallow them from understanding the alternate views you are trying to impart.