• davehtaylor@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    11 days ago

    If a HumanA pushed and convinced HumanB to kill themselves, then HumanA caused it. IMO they murdered them. It doesn’t matter if they didn’t pull the trigger. I don’t care what the legal definitions say.

    If a chatbot did the same thing, it’s no different. Except in this case, it’s a team of developers behind it that did so, that allowed it to do so. Character.ai has blood on their hands, should be completely dismantled, and every single person at that company tried for manslaughter.

    • ᵀʰᵉʳᵃᵖʸᴳᵃʳʸ@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      11 days ago

      Except character.ai didn’t explicitly push or convince him to commit suicide. When he explicitly mentioned suicide, it made efforts to dissuade him and showed concern. When it supposedly encouraged him, it was in the context of a roleplay in which it said “please do” in response to him “coming home,” which GPT3.5 doesn’t have the context or reasoning abilities to recognize as a euphemism for suicide when the character it’s roleplaying is dead and the user alive

      Regardless, it’s a tool designed for roleplay. It doesn’t work if it breaks character

    • Buttons@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      11 days ago

      Your comment might cause me to do something. You’re responsible. I don’t care what the legal definitions say.

      If we don’t care about legal definitions, then how do we know you didn’t cause all this?