4 ms·

This seems unrelated to the chatbot aspect: > And at 76, his family says, he was in a diminished state: He’d suffered a stroke nearly a decade ago and had rece

by sxp 1y ago

This seems unrelated to the chatbot aspect: > And at 76, his family says, he was in a diminished state: He’d suffered a stroke nearly a decade ago and had recently gotten lost walking in his neighborhood in Piscataway, New Jersey. ... > Rushing in the dark with a roller-bag suitcase to catch a train to meet her, Bue fell near a parking lot on a Rutgers University campus in New Brunswick, New Jersey, injuring his head and neck. After three days on life support and surrounded by his family, he was pronounced dead on March 28.

maxwell 1y ago
Why was he rushing in the dark with a roller-bag suitcase to catch the train? To meet someone he met online who claimed multiple times to be real.
- browningstreet 1y ago
  Yeah.. my first instinct was to be more skeptical about the story I was reading, because I hate Meta and people can get in trouble all on their own. But I finished the whole story and between the blue check mark, the insistence that it's real, and the romantic/flirty escalations, I'm less enthusiastic that Meta is in the clear. Safety and guard rails may be an ongoing development in AI, but at the least, AI needs to more hard-coded w/r/t honesty & clarity about what it is.
  - Ajedi32 1y ago
    > AI needs to more hard-coded w/r/t honesty & clarity about what it is That precludes the existence of fictional character AIs like Meta is trying to create, does it not? Knowing when to stay in character and when not to seems like a very difficult problem to solve. Should LLM characters in video games be banned, because they might claim to be real? The article says "Chats begin with disclaimers that information may be inaccurate." and shows a screenshot of the chat bot clearly being labeled as "AI". Exactly how many disclaimers should be necessary? Or is no amount of disclaimers acceptable when the bot itself might claim otherwise?
    - browningstreet 1y ago
      > Knowing when to stay in character and when not to seems like a very difficult problem to solve. Should LLM characters in video games be banned, because they might claim to be real? In video games? I'm having trouble taking this objection to my suggestion seriously.
      - gs17 1y ago
        Really, your response should be that the video game use case is easier to detect going off track. It's a lot more feasible to detect when Random Peasant #2154 in Skyrim is breaking the fourth wall than a generic chatbot. The exact same scenario as the article could happen with an NPC in a game if there's no/poor guardrails. An LLM-powered NPC could definitely start insisting that it's a real person that's in love with you, with a real address you should come visit right now, because there's not necessarily an inherent difference in capability when the same chatbot is in a video game context.
      - Ajedi32 1y ago
        Why? They're exactly the same thing, just in a slightly different context. The article is about a fictional character AI, not a generic informational chat bot.
        strongpigeon 1y ago
        But the difference in context is exactly what matters here no? When you're playing a game, it's very clear you're you're playing a game. When you chatting with a bot in the same interface that you chat with your other friends, that line becomes much blurrier.
        Ajedi32 1y ago
        There was an obvious disclaimer though, and the chat window was clearly labeled "AI"; it's not like Meta was trying to pass this off as a real person. So is this just a question of how many warnings need to be in place before users are allowed to chat with fictional characters? Or should this entire use case be banned, as the root commenter seemed to be suggesting?
- hoppp 1y ago
  Because he was mentally handicapped
edent 1y ago
One day, not too long from now, you'll grow old. Your eyesight will fade, your back will hurt, and your brain will find it harder to process information. Do people like you deserve to be protected by society? If a predatory company tries to scam you, should we say "sxp was old; they had it coming!"?
- mathiaspoint 1y ago
  I often say if I'm diagnosed with some serious cancer I'd probably try to sail the northwest passage rather than seeking treatment. I'm sure some people want absolute maximum raw time but plenty of us would prefer adventure right up to the end and I don't think denying us that is appropriate either.
  - freehorse 1y ago
    We are talking about scamming people here, not whether 76ers should be let to go on adventures.
    - mathiaspoint 1y ago
      We're talking about "having society protect them." They're the same thing. Only you can really judge if engaging in some dangerous activity is a gain for you.
      - mdhb 1y ago
        That idea really doesn’t hold up to even the most gentle of scrutiny.
      - roryirvine 1y ago
        Imagine if, having been diagnosed with serious cancer, you spent your life savings on a Northwest Passage trip which turned out to be a scam invented by Meta. Are you really saying that you should have no recourse against Meta for scamming you?
      - freehorse 1y ago
at-fates-hands 1y ago
Good point. Another highlight of the woeful US health care system: By early this year, Bue had begun suffering bouts of confusion. Linda booked him for a dementia screening, but the first available appointment was three months out. Three months for a dementia screening is insane. Had he gotten the screening and been made aware what was happening, this might've been avoided. Tragic that our health care system is a joke for the most vulnerable.

by sxp 1y ago

maxwell 1y ago

Why was he rushing in the dark with a roller-bag suitcase to catch the train? To meet someone he met online who claimed multiple times to be real.

browningstreet 1y ago
Yeah.. my first instinct was to be more skeptical about the story I was reading, because I hate Meta and people can get in trouble all on their own. But I finished the whole story and between the blue check mark, the insistence that it's real, and the romantic/flirty escalations, I'm less enthusiastic that Meta is in the clear. Safety and guard rails may be an ongoing development in AI, but at the least, AI needs to more hard-coded w/r/t honesty & clarity about what it is.
- Ajedi32 1y ago
  > AI needs to more hard-coded w/r/t honesty & clarity about what it is That precludes the existence of fictional character AIs like Meta is trying to create, does it not? Knowing when to stay in character and when not to seems like a very difficult problem to solve. Should LLM characters in video games be banned, because they might claim to be real? The article says "Chats begin with disclaimers that information may be inaccurate." and shows a screenshot of the chat bot clearly being labeled as "AI". Exactly how many disclaimers should be necessary? Or is no amount of disclaimers acceptable when the bot itself might claim otherwise?
  - browningstreet 1y ago
    > Knowing when to stay in character and when not to seems like a very difficult problem to solve. Should LLM characters in video games be banned, because they might claim to be real? In video games? I'm having trouble taking this objection to my suggestion seriously.
    - gs17 1y ago
      Really, your response should be that the video game use case is easier to detect going off track. It's a lot more feasible to detect when Random Peasant #2154 in Skyrim is breaking the fourth wall than a generic chatbot. The exact same scenario as the article could happen with an NPC in a game if there's no/poor guardrails. An LLM-powered NPC could definitely start insisting that it's a real person that's in love with you, with a real address you should come visit right now, because there's not necessarily an inherent difference in capability when the same chatbot is in a video game context.
    - Ajedi32 1y ago
      Why? They're exactly the same thing, just in a slightly different context. The article is about a fictional character AI, not a generic informational chat bot.
      - strongpigeon 1y ago
        But the difference in context is exactly what matters here no? When you're playing a game, it's very clear you're you're playing a game. When you chatting with a bot in the same interface that you chat with your other friends, that line becomes much blurrier.
        Ajedi32 1y ago
        There was an obvious disclaimer though, and the chat window was clearly labeled "AI"; it's not like Meta was trying to pass this off as a real person. So is this just a question of how many warnings need to be in place before users are allowed to chat with fictional characters? Or should this entire use case be banned, as the root commenter seemed to be suggesting?
hoppp 1y ago
Because he was mentally handicapped

edent 1y ago

One day, not too long from now, you'll grow old. Your eyesight will fade, your back will hurt, and your brain will find it harder to process information. Do people like you deserve to be protected by society? If a predatory company tries to scam you, should we say "sxp was old; they had it coming!"?

mathiaspoint 1y ago
I often say if I'm diagnosed with some serious cancer I'd probably try to sail the northwest passage rather than seeking treatment. I'm sure some people want absolute maximum raw time but plenty of us would prefer adventure right up to the end and I don't think denying us that is appropriate either.
- freehorse 1y ago
  We are talking about scamming people here, not whether 76ers should be let to go on adventures.
  - mathiaspoint 1y ago
    We're talking about "having society protect them." They're the same thing. Only you can really judge if engaging in some dangerous activity is a gain for you.
    - mdhb 1y ago
      That idea really doesn’t hold up to even the most gentle of scrutiny.
    - roryirvine 1y ago
      Imagine if, having been diagnosed with serious cancer, you spent your life savings on a Northwest Passage trip which turned out to be a scam invented by Meta. Are you really saying that you should have no recourse against Meta for scamming you?
    - freehorse 1y ago

at-fates-hands 1y ago

Good point. Another highlight of the woeful US health care system: By early this year, Bue had begun suffering bouts of confusion. Linda booked him for a dementia screening, but the first available appointment was three months out. Three months for a dementia screening is insane. Had he gotten the screening and been made aware what was happening, this might've been avoided. Tragic that our health care system is a joke for the most vulnerable.