4 ms·

> That said, stuff like this definitely makes me think there's a lot of people on the margin who would be affected by what a chatbot says. Yeah, that's the pro

by chx 2y ago

> That said, stuff like this definitely makes me think there's a lot of people on the margin who would be affected by what a chatbot says. Yeah, that's the problem. Tech bros high on the AI kool-aid think the problem is not the chatbot driving him to suicide but having access to a gun.

ben_w 2y ago
It's alowed to be both. Though in this case, I'd point fingers at "American culture" rather than "tech bros": As the Onion says: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27No_Way_to_Prevent_This,%27_Says_Only_Nation_Where_This_Regularly_Happens https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27No_Way_to_Prevent_This,%27_...
- chx 2y ago
  No, you do not get it, the Onion is about guns Guns are pretty much irrelevant to the story, that's my point The focus of the story is an AI chatbot murdering a human Well, that's not the right words, we do not even have the right words for this because murder presumes intent and obviously there's no intent An automated plagiarism machine has spewed such bullshit which pushed a teen to suicide. Perhaps that's the right wording.
  - ben_w 2y ago
    The fact that the UK demonstrably reduced suicide rates as a result of making it very marginally less easy to get a no-prescription-needed painkiller, makes me think that there's plenty of people on the edge. Easy access to firearms is totally in the same category as easy access to painkillers to overdose on, and has been demonstrated by similar research: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4566524/#:~:text=Firearms%20legislation%20is%20a%20politically,15%20in%20the%20United%20States https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4566524/#:~:text=Fi.... I have opined before that I would be surprised if ChatGPT specifically has caused the deaths of fewer than 200 people, just by giving bad advice — that's one in a million of the users, and I think that's plausible given the story of a different chatbot almost leading to botulism poisoning. I also think that the general internet should have an 18 rating: to the extent that the argument for film classifications is valid, and that the internet is too big to be classified and also definitely contains examples of things beyond the most extreme allowed in cinema etc., we should treat it like it's 18-only content except where demonstrably suitable for younger audiences.

by chx 2y ago

ben_w 2y ago

It's alowed to be both. Though in this case, I'd point fingers at "American culture" rather than "tech bros": As the Onion says: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27No_Way_to_Prevent_This,%27_Says_Only_Nation_Where_This_Regularly_Happens https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27No_Way_to_Prevent_This,%27_...

chx 2y ago
No, you do not get it, the Onion is about guns Guns are pretty much irrelevant to the story, that's my point The focus of the story is an AI chatbot murdering a human Well, that's not the right words, we do not even have the right words for this because murder presumes intent and obviously there's no intent An automated plagiarism machine has spewed such bullshit which pushed a teen to suicide. Perhaps that's the right wording.
- ben_w 2y ago
  The fact that the UK demonstrably reduced suicide rates as a result of making it very marginally less easy to get a no-prescription-needed painkiller, makes me think that there's plenty of people on the edge. Easy access to firearms is totally in the same category as easy access to painkillers to overdose on, and has been demonstrated by similar research: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4566524/#:~:text=Firearms%20legislation%20is%20a%20politically,15%20in%20the%20United%20States https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4566524/#:~:text=Fi.... I have opined before that I would be surprised if ChatGPT specifically has caused the deaths of fewer than 200 people, just by giving bad advice — that's one in a million of the users, and I think that's plausible given the story of a different chatbot almost leading to botulism poisoning. I also think that the general internet should have an 18 rating: to the extent that the argument for film classifications is valid, and that the internet is too big to be classified and also definitely contains examples of things beyond the most extreme allowed in cinema etc., we should treat it like it's 18-only content except where demonstrably suitable for younger audiences.