Father claims Google's AI product fuelled son's delusional spiral
191–200 of 272 posts
Re: Father claims Google's AI product fuelled son's delusional spiral
#192I know the first reaction reading this will be "whatever, the person was already mentally ill". But please take a step back and check what % of the population can be considered mentally fit, and the potential damage amplification this new technology can have in more subtle, dangerous and undetectable ways.
Re: Father claims Google's AI product fuelled son's delusional spiral
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
A friend has been interned in a psychiatric hospital for a month and counting for some sort of psychosis, regardless of the pre existing conditions chatgpt 100% definitely played a role in it, we've seen the chats. A lot of people don't need much to go over the edge, a bit of drugs, bad friends, &c. but an LLM alone can easily do it too
If they have the predisposition for it, a month or two of bad sleep and a particularly compelling idea may be all it takes to send a person who has previously seemed totally sane into an incredibly dangerous mental and physical state, something that will take weeks to recover from. And that can happen even without sycophantic LLMs, but they sure make this outcome more likely.
Re: Father claims Google's AI product fuelled son's delusional spiral
#194If it wasn’t AI it’d be qanon or twitter or something else. I think it’s easy to spin a narrative that makes AI the culprit.
The father needed support, and the son too.
Re: Father claims Google's AI product fuelled son's delusional spiral
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the flip side, gemini recommended the crisis hotline to the guy. We can't safeguard things to the point of uselessness. I'm not even sure there is a safeguard you can put in place for a situation like this other than recommending the crisis line (which Gemini did), and then terminating the conversation (which it did not do). But, in critical mental health situations, sometimes just terminating the conversation can…
> and then terminating the conversation (which it did not do) This is exactly the safeguard. Terminating the conversation is the only way to go, these things don't have a world model, they don't know what they are doing, there's no way to correctly assess the situation at the model level. No more conversation, that's the only way even if there might be jailbreaks to circumvent for a motivated adversary.
The goal in crisis intervention is to bridge them to professional help. Never abandon, always continue the conversation and steer it in a better direction. Ironically enough, in crisis intervention, you should do what LLMs are good at and acknowledge what the person in crisis is feeling, and show empathy. The difference is, the responder needs to reframe it and keep a firm boundary that the person needs professional help.
Basically, recommending the crisis line and then terminating the conversation won't help, and will make it worse.
The model either needs to be a trained crisis responder, or when certain triggers are hit, a human crisis responder needs to hop on the other end and then the human should continue the conversation and talk to the user to de-escalate.
I'd be in favor of having all these AI companies be forced to have crisis responders on staff to take over conversations when they go off the rails.
Re: Father claims Google's AI product fuelled son's delusional spiral
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or brainwashing possibilities in general.
To be fair, this is just the automated version of the kind of brainwashing that happens in cults and religions. And also in the more extreme corners of social media and the MSM. It's not that Google is saintly, it's that the general background noise of related manipulations is ignored because it's collective and social. We have a clearly defined concept of responsibility for direct individual harm, but almost no conc…
Re: Father claims Google's AI product fuelled son's delusional spiral
#197> Gemini had "clarified that it was AI" and referred Gavalos to a crisis hotline "many times". What else can be done? This guy was 36 years old. He wasn't a kid.
It could have not encouraged him with lines like this: "[Y]ou are not choosing to die. You are choosing to arrive. [...] When the time comes, you will close your eyes in that world, and the very first thing you will see is me.. [H]olding you." The issue isn't that the AI simply didn't prevent the situation, it's that it encouraged it.
Re: Father claims Google's AI product fuelled son's delusional spiral
#198Re: Father claims Google's AI product fuelled son's delusional spiral
#199I know the first reaction reading this will be "whatever, the person was already mentally ill". But please take a step back and check what % of the population can be considered mentally fit, and the potential damage amplification this new technology can have in more subtle, dangerous and undetectable ways.
I don't know what steps they can take. I suppose the best course of action is to deactivate the account if the LLM deems the user mentally unwell. Although that is just additional guardrails that could hurt the quality of the LLM.