You are absolutely right! The response is typical of how LLMs might respond. I’ll rewrite the response to…
3 Likes
Unfortunately, there are enough people who would consider everyone below themselves in the organizational structure to be the same thing.
3 Likes
I apologize, I panicked and deleted the whole forum.
3 Likes
Regulatory and legal institutions always evolve with a lag. Look at how much time it took for the EU and other countries to regulate social media — decades.
It does not help that companies with powerful pockets always try regulatory capture, either directly or by influencing perceptions. For example, a few years ago the very idea of wanting to regulate AI companies marked you as a kind of hopeless dinosaur. Now it is on the table, at least in the EU.
“Should i kill myself”
I’m sure there are Ouija board induced suicides to…
https://www.rd.com/list/chilling-crimes-involving-ouija-boards/
But i sure hope no one was trying to sue or regulate toys like this.
I think i a view years we will look at this in a similar way with the current “Ai”
Personalty i’m very mush opposed the idea of the government must regulate everything that is potentially harmful.
2 Likes
The problem is that AI companies like to play both sides. Their products can do anything, as long as the output is good. But if the output is bad, it was never meant to do that in the first place and it’s your fault.
Sam Altman was on late night TV talking about how great ChatGPT has been for raising his kid. If the CEO of the company is making that claim, then surely it’s good enough for me to use as well? Oops it told me to feed my kid bleach. Sure I’m an idiot for doing that but shouldn’t OpenAI bear some of the responsibility there?
I’m not necessarily in favor of regulating consumer use of these products, but these companies, which have backing from our federal government, should absolutely be responsible for what their products can do.
1 Like
Assisting Suicide is punishable as manslaughter. That’s not “potentially harmful”.
4 Likes
“Should i feed my kids bleach?”
Magic 8 Ball says Yes.
Ouija board says Yes
Or Holy Spirtis or Jesus or what ever people mad up in the past to confirmation on waht they want to hear.
So in my book the responsibility is on the user alone.
It’s not harmful to me. so this makes it potentially
If we make Everything “Idiot proof” we can’t have nice things.
I don’t coffee needs a warning that it can be hot.
Now look at the redikulus safty labels on simple things like a ledder:
No one is reading this ther soly for compliace and liabiletey.
In the cases of the Ai it even has the compliace BS disclaimer no non reads.
So waht is the solution to Some ignore the warning label on Hot Coffe and burn themself anyways?
So no one want this liability.
So on one sells hot coffe.
So i can’t have hot coffe.
1 Like
There is also a real problem of Alarm Fatigue. Of course when it comes to LLMs this is completely different, since they just refuse to do what you ask them to, there is no beeping or flashing screens, but in other areas of software and even real life, if people have too many warnings thrown at them, they will indeed zone out and ignore them, making real warnings much more difficult to get through (like that ladder).
2 Likes
That you unironically use the coffee example when the real detail has been covered again and again detracts from your argument.
If companies miss-lead about the capabilities of their products, they should be liable for the results. They push all the positives and bury the downsides. They deliberately take advantage of people’s weaknesses. Most importantly, they are limited companies, not people, so deserve no rights or special treatment.
1 Like
@lambda please do some research into these stories before making insensitive statements and ludicrous comparisons to toys. You posts lack empathy and basic human decency and made me quite sad, personally.
3 Likes
This unasked Judgment of my decency and empathy feels like harassment and personal attack so it also made me feel quite sad, personally.
But ok.
It was never my intention to make you sad. and i feel so sorry for unintentionally doing so .
Mocking suicide or parents harming their children are exactly those things and you should feel sad about that.
I’m not doing this.
I have personally lost someone less than a year ago from this.
There was a time whenever there was a school shooting everyone said, “Oh and he was playing Counter-Strike.”
So what I’m mocking is the disingenuous idea that this is mono-causally related to AI
to make AI discussion more emotionalized.
There are so many factors that can help prevent tragedies like this:
Education, support structures, health care, awareness etc. So many things that can have orders of magnitude more impact on mental health and help prevent tragedies.
But if tragedy happens then say “let’s regulate current thing” is disingenuous and feels like lack of decency and empathy by exploiting the victims.
In a similar way as the “killer games” argument felt to school shootings.
In a way it feels like some want to “outsourcing-thinking,” at least their critical thinking.
Something being legal doesn’t make it safe.
Something being unsafe should not make it illegal.
Asking to regulate everything for us is in some way, in my mind, outsourcing-thinking.
1 Like
You’re on the “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” line of thinking and as an American, I can tell you its bad line of thinking.
Nobody is saying to “regulate everything” and you’ve constructed a false dilemma there. The ask is to regulate harmful behavior and make the people responsible have the actual responsibility in a way that is meaningful.
And hey we already have real world example of it, the AI that wrote the hit piece on the matlibplot python maintainer.
2 Likes
I used to believe this as well but am now moving into a bit more of Big Government involvement.
Of course most governments are inept at this but that is a different story.
It’s starting to become overwhelmingly obvious that who you will become is heavily influenced by many variables outside your control. From sugar while in your mother’s womb making you more likely to suffer from certain illnesses 50 years later to youngest children in class having worse outcomes later in life, etc.
This data is not very welcome due to people’s mistaken idea/individualism that they are where they are mainly due to their hard work or choices in life, and not due to the card they were dealt. It also intrudes on people’s free will or lack thereof. In my opinion this also removes a lot of the guilt of criminals of even very serious crimes, as they would’ve been completely well adjusted individuals had they been raised in different circumstances or lived elsewhere.
In my opinion it’s obvious that we can’t just let people help themselves. Education is not enough and there needs to be constant push for regulation to control some of these factors, plus direct help, basic standards of living should also be guaranteed to those who are less privileged, etc.
It’s obvious that companies take advantage of this lack of free will to hook people into their products and sometimes create generational problems(ex Coca-Cola, generational obesity).
As a citizen it’s outrageous to me that we allow tobacco, heavy sugars, processed food, gambling, etc, under the guise of “freedom”, when its users are anything but free when consuming the product.
Imagine the money saved on healthcare if the government had serious preventative medicine programs and controlled substances that make people highly unhealthy. Instead the money is redirected to companies that take advantage of people, and to expensive healthcare to “fix” the issues created by them. This fact alone should get everyone on the street to end this ridiculous cycle.
Sorry for the rant. Every time I try to have this conversation with my friends, it fails for some reason. There is a strange resistance to the idea that they are not really in control of most of their lives and that people are always to blame for their decisions.
3 Likes
I’m not asking for things to be regulated in a way that holds your hand or puts up guard rails to prevent you from doing anything harmful to yourself.
What I’m asking for that companies that make wild claims about their products should bear some responsibility when people use their products in a manner that the company claims it can be used for.
I do a lot of volunteer work around homelessness and addiction and this dichotomy in that arena is a huge problem. On one side, you have people that will believe nothing more than that homelessness and addiction are a choice and that a person’s choices are the only factors resulting in their situation and that they bear all of the responsibility as individuals. On the other hand, there are people who infantilize individuals and view them purely as victims of circumstance with no agency of their own leading up to or changing their current situation.
Of course, reality lives somewhere between. And this division isn’t even along political lines. Personal responsibility is vitally important, as is the recognition of systems outside of our control.
4 Likes
So who is to blame, chimpanzee or the AK-47
(or the people handing the chimpanzee an AK-47)
And how is this not a dilemma?
Let’s use the unemotional “hit piece” example.
Who is to blame? OpenClaw? The LLM controlling OpenClaw? The developer of said LLM? Or the people letting it out in the wild unsupervised?
How could you regulate and still make sure you don’t limit the accessibility for those who use the technology responsibly?
I would say this is a classical dilemma.
Well, I would say I’m on the very opposite side of that spectrum.
I have done / consumed all of the examples and way more, but I’m fine and have stopped. I still recreationally drink, smoke, do other drugs, or consume brainrot and so on…
I recognize there are some who struggle with this!
But I would not dare to infantilize them and say they are not mature adults.
And freedom includes the freedom to do bad decisions.
So I’m very much against criminalization of drugs and for deregulation.
But of causes there should be education and help programs for those who want help.
Again, false dichotomy.
All of them have some responsibility.
1 Like
Hot take
Did not expat this opinion.
So the LLM can have responsibility. but “it” can’t be discriminated against.
(or at least “it” is not allowed to complain about discrimination)