this post was submitted on 19 Jan 2026
239 points (95.1% liked)
Technology
78964 readers
3279 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Look man......I hate AI too....but you can't just use it as a scapegoat to cover for humans being humans.
Should the AI be telling him to do more and more drugs until he died? Well, no, but also.....maybe don't do dangerous drugs at all.
Like if chatgpt says to shoot yourself in the face, and you do, is it chatgpt's fault you killed yourself? Or was it you killing yourself at fault for killing you?
This world is getting dumber and dumber.
Basically the entire US economy, every employer, many schools, and half of the commercials on TV are telling us to use and trust AI.
Kid was already using the bot for advice on homework and relationships (two things that people are fucking encouraged to do depending on who you ask). The bot shouldn't give lethal advice. And if it's even capable of doing that, we all need to take a huuuuuuge step back.
Kid was curious and cautious, and AI gave him incorrect information and the confidence to act on that information.
He was 19. Cut this victim blaming bullshit. Being a kid is hard enough before technology went full cyberpunk.
19 is not a 'kid'. Sorry of having to be that guy, but he was already an adult, a young adult at that.
No, fuck not holding dumbfucks responsible for being dumb as fuck.
Just read the article.
Ehhh...I dunno.
Go back 20 years and we had similar articles, just about the Web, because it was new to a lot of people then.
searches
https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/internet-killed-my-daughter/28397087.html
https://archive.ph/pJ8Dw
https://archive.ph/i9syP
And before that, I remember video games.
It happens periodically
something new shows up, and then you'll have people concerned about any potential harm associated with it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_panic
I'm not sure that we're doing better than people in the past did on this sort of thing, but I'm not sure that we're doing worse, either.
It wasn't the internet/web that harmed those people. It was people on the internet. And people were telling each other to be cautious when using the internet.
Unlike modern LLMs which are advertised as intelligent enough to be used in professional settings. And unlike perpetrators in other cases, no one is punishing OpenAI, or Google or whatever the fuck AI company is responsible.
So yeah, this is worse than before.
Great post and I agree 100%!
Doesn't even have to be a new thing either. Video games are still used as a scapegoat. Same as with music, and TV shows, and movies.
The "internet" is still killing teenagers because of social media bullying.
I wished our lawmakers were of a less senile age so we can write and pass more appropriate laws for this stuff...but not much we can do.
Talk with them. Explain stuff. Vote for better ones. It's still not much, but it's better than doing nothing and letting them keep on blundering unchallenged.
The point isn't to absolve people of making bad decisions, but that doesn't mean the companies whose tools provide dangerous advice in a friendly and factual manner should be without accountability.
Consider that people in all possible situations and mental health conditions have access to these tools.
Well shit, maybe we shouldn't hold humans responsible for the actions that they convince another human to take. After all, the victim is just a human being a human, right?
I mean it's not illegal for someone to tell someone else to take more drugs. If two guys are hanging out and one says "hey I think I think I should take more drugs" and the other says "hell yeah brother do it" they aren't responsible if the first guy ODs.
They are indirectly responsible. Dangerously close, depending on circumstances, of being criminally responsible.
A LOT of fraternities have gotten in BIG trouble for hazing practices that led to the death of a 'candidate'.
You mean that if you convinced somebody to do something stupid...and then they did it and died...you wouldn't feel guilty at all?
I mean, aren't they? In a moral, ethical, and social stance, don't they share in the blame?
Depending on the circumstances, yes, that would totally be illegal.
It's called "aiding and abetting". In most countries it's illegal to convince someone to do something illegal.
If you are someone the victim sees as an authority figure (especially if the victim is a minor), a bunch of other other charges can be added too.
In Canada, the UK or the USA, for example, someone who "aided or abetted" someone to commit a crime can be punished exactly as if they had committed the crime themselves.
A 19-year-old doesn't have a fully-developed brain yet.
I don't think that this is necessarily an issue of people being stupid though. People are being encouraged to use AI as a replacement for search engines, and to plug any question they have into it and trust the answers that they are given. Blindly following that may be stupid in many cases, but there are also plenty of cases where a person is developmentally disabled, or young and ignorant, or in a mental state that makes them bad at processing information correctly. We should be putting safeguards in place to protect vulnerable people from obvious dangers, even if it saves some idiots by accident.