Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article is Aug 26, 2025, and describes events from April, over a year ago. Safeguards have improved drastically since then. > Many continue to ignore the fact that they're hurting kids for profit. That's a rather hyperbolic way of putting it. A side effect of this particular product is that it occasionally harms kids. They're not profiting off of the harm, nor is the harm deliberate. Cars harm kids. There's decad…
> Safeguards have improved drastically since then Source? Seriously. I'd love to see data showing deaths–or even frequencies–have dropped. My views on AI for under-16s is still evolving. Given how the AI companies are fighting these cases in court, and given their backers’ public rhetoric, I suspect they aren't seeing a one-off risk. > Cars harm kids This is tobacco-industry rhetoric. The relevant facts are frequency…
> This is tobacco-industry rhetoric. The relevant facts are frequency, magnitude and novelty
Cars are literally the number one killer of children 0-14 in the United States. More than cancer, more than guns, more than the next 7 reasons combined.
> But AI companies are uniquely defensive, dismissive and negligent when it comes to harming kids.
You should see how people feel if you ask them to give up some street parking to make streets safer for kids and everybody else! Jesus Christ himself gave them the spot in front of their house and fuck you for suggesting they park across the street or on their own property!