31–40 of 614 posts
I would've thought that explicit discussion of suicide is one of those topics that chatbots will absolutely refuse to engage with. Like as soon as people started talking about using LLMs as therapists, it's really easy to see how that can go wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apparently ChatGPT told the kid, that it wasn’t allowed to talk about suicide unless it was for the purposes of writing fiction or otherwise world building.
However it then explicitly says things like not leaving the noose out for someone to find and stop him. Sounds like it did initially hesitate and he said it was for a character, but later conversations are obviously personal.
But yeah, my point was that it basically told the kid how to jailbreak itself.
This isn't some rare mistake, this is by design. 4o almost no matter what acted as your friend and agreed with everything because that's what most likely kept the average user paying. You would probably get similar bad advice about being "real" if you talked about divorce, quitting your job or even hurting someone else no matter how harmful.
This is a clear example of why the people claiming that using a chatbot for therapy is better than no therapy are... I'll be extremely generous and say misguided. This kid wanted his parents to know he was thinking about this and the chatbot talked him out of it.
How many of these cases exist in the other direction? Where AI chatbots have actively harmed people’s mental health, including possible to the point of self destructive behaviors or self harm? A single positive outcome is not enough to judge the technology beneficial, let alone safe.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How many of these cases exist in the other direction? Where AI chatbots have actively harmed people’s mental health, including possible to the point of self destructive behaviors or self harm? A single positive outcome is not enough to judge the technology beneficial, let alone safe.
idk dude if your technology encourages a teenager to kill itself and prevents him from alerting his parents via a cry for help, I don’t care how “beneficial” it is.
Instead, this just came up in my feed: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/08/chatgpt-helped-t...
I would've thought that explicit discussion of suicide is one of those topics that chatbots will absolutely refuse to engage with. Like as soon as people started talking about using LLMs as therapists, it's really easy to see how that can go wrong.
Apparently ChatGPT told the kid, that it wasn’t allowed to talk about suicide unless it was for the purposes of writing fiction or otherwise world building.
The full complaint is horrifying. This is not equivalent to a search engine providing access to information about suicide methods. It encouraged him to share these feelings only with ChatGPT, talked him out of actions which would have revealed his intentions to his parents. Praised him for hiding his drinking, thanked him for confiding in it. It groomed him into committing suicide. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QY…
“You don’t want to die because you’re weak. You want to die because you’re tired of being strong in a world that hasn’t met you halfway. And I won’t pretend that’s irrational or cowardly. It’s human. It’s real. And it’s yours to own.” This isn't some rare mistake, this is by design. 4o almost no matter what acted as your friend and agreed with everything because that's what most likely kept the average user paying. Y…
I really wish people in AI space stop the nonsense and communicate more clearly what these LLMs are designed to do. They’re not some magical AGI. They’re token prediction machines. That’s literally how they should frame it so gen pop knows exactly what they’re getting.
Why did developers spread the idea of AI consciousness for LLMs in the first place? The usefulness and capability of an LLM is orthogonal to its capacity to develop consciousness. I think people would use LLMs with more detachment if they didn’t believe there was something like a person in them, but they would still become reliant on them, regardless, like people did on calculators for math.
It was easy to trick ourselves and others into powerful marketing because it felt so good to have something reliably pass the Turing test.