Teen killed himself after ‘months of encouragement from ChatGPT’, lawsuit claims
Technology
88
Beiträge
51
Kommentatoren
0
Aufrufe
-
He was sending it 650 messages a day. This kid was lonely. He needed a person to talk to.
If only he had parents
-
Me too. Nearly every job posting I see now wants some experience with AI. I make the argument AI is not always correct and will output what you want it to have a bias. Since biases are not always correct, the data/information is useless.
Yeah, I have some background in History and ChatGTP will be objectively wrong with some things. Then I will tell it is wrong because X, Y and Z, and then the stupid thing will come back with, "Yes, you are right, X, Y, Z were a thing because...".
If I didn't know that it was wrong, or if say, a student took what it said at face value, then they too would now be wrong. Literal misinformation.
Not to mention the other times it is wrong, and not just chatGTP because it will source things like Reddit. Recently Brave AI made the claim that Ironfox the Firefox fork was based on FF ESR. That is impossible since Ironfox is a fork for Android. So why was it wrong? It quoted some random guy who said that on Reddit.
-
If only he had parents
Or a society
-
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.
Real answer: AI alignment is a very difficult and fundamentally unsolved problem. Whole nonprofits (“institutes”) have popped up with the purpose of solving AI alignment. It’s not getting solved (ever, IMO).
-
The makers of ChatGPT are changing the way it responds to users who show mental and emotional distress after legal action from the family of 16-year-old Adam Raine, who killed himself after months of conversations with the chatbot.
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.
The $500bn (£372bn) San Francisco AI company said it would also introduce parental controls to allow parents “options to gain more insight into, and shape, how their teens use ChatGPT”, but has yet to provide details about how these would work.
Adam, from California, killed himself in April after what his family’s lawyer called “months of encouragement from ChatGPT”. The teenager’s family is suing Open AI and its chief executive and co-founder, Sam Altman, alleging that the version of ChatGPT at that time, known as 4o, was “rushed to market … despite clear safety issues”.
I read some of that lawsuit. OpenAI murdered that kid.
-
Real answer: AI alignment is a very difficult and fundamentally unsolved problem. Whole nonprofits (“institutes”) have popped up with the purpose of solving AI alignment. It’s not getting solved (ever, IMO).
I think OP knows this. It's an unsolvable problem. The conclusion from that might be that this tech shouldn't be 2 clicks away from every teen, or even person's, hand.
-
I read some of that lawsuit. OpenAI murdered that kid.
Can you share anything here please? I'm no fan of OpenAI but I haven't seen anything yet that makes me think ChatGPT was particularly relevant to this poor teen's actions.
-
Unpopular opinion - parents fail parenting and now getting a big pay day and ruining the tool for everyone else.
Not encouraging users to kill themselves is "ruining it"? Lmao
-
Not encouraging users to kill themselves is "ruining it"? Lmao
Thats not how llm safety guards work. Just like any guard it'll affect legitimate uses too as llms can't really reason and understand nuance.
-
In the very first post on this thread I pointed out that I'm not talking about this specific case at all.
Fair enough but in the post I replied to you did say you won’t blame the parents “here” in the slightest, which to me means “here in this specific case”.
-
Me too. Nearly every job posting I see now wants some experience with AI. I make the argument AI is not always correct and will output what you want it to have a bias. Since biases are not always correct, the data/information is useless.
Managers love yes-men so the more biased the better
-
I can't wait for the AI bubble to burst. It's fuckign cancer
when the bubble is over, I am pretty sure a lot of this stuff will still exist and be used. the popping is simply a market valuation adjustment
-
Real answer: AI alignment is a very difficult and fundamentally unsolved problem. Whole nonprofits (“institutes”) have popped up with the purpose of solving AI alignment. It’s not getting solved (ever, IMO).
AI alignment is very easy and it's chaotic evil.
-
Can you share anything here please? I'm no fan of OpenAI but I haven't seen anything yet that makes me think ChatGPT was particularly relevant to this poor teen's actions.
ChatGPT told him how to tie the noose and even gave a load bearing analysis of the noose setup. It offered to write the suicide note. Here’s a link to the lawsuit.
-
Yeah, I have some background in History and ChatGTP will be objectively wrong with some things. Then I will tell it is wrong because X, Y and Z, and then the stupid thing will come back with, "Yes, you are right, X, Y, Z were a thing because...".
If I didn't know that it was wrong, or if say, a student took what it said at face value, then they too would now be wrong. Literal misinformation.
Not to mention the other times it is wrong, and not just chatGTP because it will source things like Reddit. Recently Brave AI made the claim that Ironfox the Firefox fork was based on FF ESR. That is impossible since Ironfox is a fork for Android. So why was it wrong? It quoted some random guy who said that on Reddit.
I get the feeling that you're missing one very important point about GenAI: it does not, and cannot (by design) know right from wrong. The only thing it knows is what word is statistically the most likely to appear after the previous one.
-
Thats not how llm safety guards work. Just like any guard it'll affect legitimate uses too as llms can't really reason and understand nuance.
That seems way more like an argument against LLMs in general, don't you think? If you cannot make it so it doesn't encourage you to suicide without ruining other uses, maybe it wasn't ready for general use?
-
ChatGPT told him how to tie the noose and even gave a load bearing analysis of the noose setup. It offered to write the suicide note. Here’s a link to the lawsuit.
Holy fuck ChatGPT killed that kid!
-
The makers of ChatGPT are changing the way it responds to users who show mental and emotional distress after legal action from the family of 16-year-old Adam Raine, who killed himself after months of conversations with the chatbot.
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.
The $500bn (£372bn) San Francisco AI company said it would also introduce parental controls to allow parents “options to gain more insight into, and shape, how their teens use ChatGPT”, but has yet to provide details about how these would work.
Adam, from California, killed himself in April after what his family’s lawyer called “months of encouragement from ChatGPT”. The teenager’s family is suing Open AI and its chief executive and co-founder, Sam Altman, alleging that the version of ChatGPT at that time, known as 4o, was “rushed to market … despite clear safety issues”.
Even though I hate a lot of what openAI is doing. Users must be more informed about llms, additional safeguards will just censor the model and make it worst. Sure they could set up a way to contact people when some kind of things are reported by the user, but we should take care before implementing a parental control that would be equivalent to reading a teen's journal and invading its privacy.
-
You can say kill you fucking moron.
Must have been on reddit a long time, I got banned for saying kill like 3 times. None of them in a mean-spirited or call-to-action context.
Self censoring is hard to deprogram yourself out of, and by the time theyre comfortable with freedom of language again who's to say it won't be the same story here?
-
That seems way more like an argument against LLMs in general, don't you think? If you cannot make it so it doesn't encourage you to suicide without ruining other uses, maybe it wasn't ready for general use?
You're absolutely right, but the counterpoint that always wins - "there's money to be made fuck you and fuck your humanity"
