News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
I get that hating on anything AI-related is trendy these days - and I especially understand the pain of a grieving mother. However, interpreting this as a chatbot encouraging someone to kill themselves is extremely dishonest when you actually look at the logs of what was said.
You can’t simultaneously argue that LLMs lack genuine understanding, empathy, and moral reasoning - and therefore shouldn't be trusted - while also saying they should have understood that “coming home” was a reference to suicide. That’s holding it to a human-level standard of emotional awareness and contextual understanding while denying it the cognitive capacities that such standards assume.
Source
I would not have understood that to have anything to do with suicide… do they use the phrase coming home to mean death or suicide in the game of thrones show?
You have to read the other chat logs. Arstechnica has a good summary I think, the link between "coming home" and suicide is specific to the kids chats with these AI.
Iirc when he did make it more explicit, the AI responded with "no, don't do that" kind of responses. He just kept the metaphor up when the AI didn't have such an association in its training data and just responded as a lover would respond to their love saying they'd come home in their training data.
Though I'd say that if a kid would shoot themself in response to a chatbot saying anything to them, the issue is more about them having any access to a gun than anything about the chatbot itself. Unless maybe if the chatbot is volunteering weaknesses common in gun safes, though even then I'd say more fault lies with the parent choosing a shitty safe and raising a kid that would kill themself on the advice of their chatbot girlfriend.
All you need to argue is that its operators have responsibility for its actions and should filter / moderate out the worst.
That still assumes level of understanding that these models don't have. How could you have prevented this one when suicide was never explicitly mentioned?
You can have multiple layers of detection mechanisms, not just within the LLM the user is talking to
I'm told sentiment analysis with LLM is a whole thing, but maybe this clever new technology doesn't do what it's promised to do? 🤔
Tldr make it discourage unhealthy use, or else at least be honest in marketing and tell people this tech is a crapshot which probably is lying to you
That AI knew exactly what it was doing and it's about time these AIs started facing real prison time instead of constantly getting a pass
LLMs are tools. They are not sentient. You must not use a tool if you can't handle it
Unironically, the provider of the chat bot should be liable for anything the chat bot says. Don't fire humans so youn can hide behind a neural network.
But this ain't suicide encouragement.
Lock it up! Lock it up! Lock it up!
You could think of LLMs as a glorified 'magic 8 ball', since that's about as much 'understanding' it has.