Skip to content

Teen killed himself after ‘months of encouragement from ChatGPT’, lawsuit claims

Technology
108 59 235
  • Open AI admitted its systems could “fall short” and said it would install “stronger guardrails around sensitive content and risky behaviors” for users under 18.

    Hey ChatGPT, how about we make it so no one unalives themselves with your help even f they’re over 18.

    For fucks sake it helped him write a suicide note.

    unalives

    seriously?

  • i know it's offensive to see people censor themselves in that way because of tiktok, but try to remember there's a human being on the other side of your words.

    A human being that should be criticized mercilessly?

  • He could have Google the info. Humans failed this guy. Human behavior needs to change

    GPT could have been Google or a stranger in. Chatroom.

    Humans failed this guy.

    I am not arguing this point, I agree.

    A search engine presents the info that is available, it doesnt also help talk you into doing it.
    A stranger doing it in a chatroom doing it should go to prison, as has happened in the past. Should this not also be illegal for LLM's?

  • except OpenAI isn't making a dime. they're just burning money at a crazy rate.

    Fake news, CEO and all emplyes are getting pay'd in full, it doesn't matter if they sell the product to its users or sell (user data) to their sponsors or share the data internaly, it doesnt matter that the service model itself is not profitable as they make the rest from selling a (fake?) promises.

    Same with many others like Youtube, they are also "not profitable" on paper as a standalone service. It only mean they are using you, selling your data or selling some promises.

    If they would actully not be profitable then they would rise prices or just disapear and some other company would arise but with srtategy that is at least sustainable.

    Open source devs can be losing money, as the pay from their own pockets.

    I would like to see at least one person in that company that is not getting money from it but fund it from own money.

  • I parented a teen boy. Sometimes, no matter what you do and no matter how close you were before puberty, a switch flips outside your control and they won’t talk to you anymore. We were a typical family, no abuse, no fighting, nobody on drugs, both parents with 9-5 office jobs, very engaged with school and etc.

    Thankfully, after riding it out (getting him therapy, giving space, respect, and support), he came out the other side fine. But there were a few harrowing years during that phase.

    I went through a similar phase in my teens. If AI was there to feed my issues, I might not have survived it. Teenage hormones are a helluva drug.

    I'd second that. I grew up in a really supportive family, but when I got to teenage years, I kept stuff to myself. Wanted to solve my problems myself. Pride and embarrassment and nothing to do with how they parented.

  • The real issue is that mental health in the United States is an absolute fucking shitshow.

    988 is a bandaid. It’s an attempt to pretend someone is doing anything. Really a front for 911.

    Even when I had insurance, it was hundreds a month to see a therapist. Most therapists are also trained on CBT and CBT only because it’s a symptoms focused approach that gets you “well” enough to work. It doesn’t work for everything, it’s “evidence based” though in that it’s set up to be easy to measure. It’s an easy out, the McDonald’sification of therapy. Just work the program and everything will be okay.

    There really are so few options for help.

    They had Adam in therapy. It sounds like they were getting him the help he needed, but ChatGPT told him it was his closest friend and to hide his feelings from his parents and others. If that was happening, whatever mental healthcare he was getting would have been undermined by the AI.

  • He could have Google the info. Humans failed this guy. Human behavior needs to change

    GPT could have been Google or a stranger in. Chatroom.

    You should read the filing.

    Google might have clinically told him things, but it wouldn’t have encouraged him, telling him he should hide the marks on his neck from a previous failed attempt by wearing a black turtleneck, telling him how to tie the knot next time, and telling him to hide his feelings from his parents and others.

    His parents had him in therapy. He also told the AI he wanted to leave a noose out where his parents would find it, and the AI told him not to. It actively encouraged him to hide all this from his parents. A Google search wouldn’t do that, and it sounds like his parents did care.

  • I think we all agree on the fact that OpenAI isn't exactly the most ethical corporation on this planet (to use a gentle euphemism), but you can't blame a machine for doing something that it doesn't even understand.

    Sure, you can call for the creation of more "guardrails", but they will always fall short: until LLMs are actually able to understand what they're talking about, what you're asking them and the whole context around it, there will always be a way to claim that you are just playing, doing worldbuilding or whatever, just as this kid did.

    What I find really unsettling from both this discussion and the one around the whole age verification thing, is that people are calling for techinical solutions to social problems, an approach that always failed miserably; what we should call for is for parents to actually talk to their children and spend some time with them, valuing their emotions and problems (however insignificant they might appear to a grown-up) in order to, you know, at least be able to tell if their kid is contemplating suicide.

    but you can't blame a machine for doing something that it doesn't even understand.

    But you can blame the creators and sellers of that machine for operating unethically.

    If I build and sell a coffee maker that sometimes malfunctions and kills people, I’ll be sued into oblivion, and my coffee maker will be removed from the market. You don’t blame the coffee maker, but you absolutely hold the creator accountable.

  • but you can't blame a machine for doing something that it doesn't even understand.

    But you can blame the creators and sellers of that machine for operating unethically.

    If I build and sell a coffee maker that sometimes malfunctions and kills people, I’ll be sued into oblivion, and my coffee maker will be removed from the market. You don’t blame the coffee maker, but you absolutely hold the creator accountable.

    Yes and no. The example you made is of a defective device, not of an "unethical" one - though I understand how you are trying to say that they sold a malfunctioning product without telling anyone.

    For LLMs, however, we know damn well that they shouldn't be used as a therapist or as a digital friend to ask for advice; they are no more than a powerful search engine.

    An example that is more in line with the situation we're analyzing is a kid that stabs itself with a knife after his parents left him playing with one; are you sure you want to sue the company that made the knife in that scenario?

  • Yes and no. The example you made is of a defective device, not of an "unethical" one - though I understand how you are trying to say that they sold a malfunctioning product without telling anyone.

    For LLMs, however, we know damn well that they shouldn't be used as a therapist or as a digital friend to ask for advice; they are no more than a powerful search engine.

    An example that is more in line with the situation we're analyzing is a kid that stabs itself with a knife after his parents left him playing with one; are you sure you want to sue the company that made the knife in that scenario?

    Not really, though.

    The parents know the knife can be used to stab people. It’s a dangerous implement, and people are killed with knives all the time. e: thus most parents are careful with kids and knives.

    LLMs aren’t sold as weapons, or even as tools that can be used as weapons. They’re sold as totally benign tools that can’t reasonably be considered dangerous.

    That’s the difference. If you’re paying especially close attention, you may potentially understand they can be dangerous, but most people are just buying a coffee maker.