Live data from Hacker News

Father claims Google's AI product fuelled son's delusional spiral

bbc.com

271–272 of 272 posts

Re: Father claims Google's AI product fuelled son's delusional spiral

#271
post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

E-bikes and e-scooters kill people daily, accidents on those things can mess people up and there are none of the safety mechanisms like crumple zones or seatbelts on a bike. If you search "e-bike deaths" you'll get hits.

Do they kill over a million people a year worldwide? How many orders of magnitude fewer people are killed by E-things? OP's point was that if you invented something today that killed over a million people per year, it probably wouldn't be allowed, and I don't think that's really that controversial a statement.

> Do they kill over a million people a year worldwide? How many orders of magnitude fewer people are killed by E-things?

On a per meter basis I'd expect bikes to be much worse. I've had more injuries on bike than in car, and people can certainly kill themselves on a bike. The main reason they don't is because the bad bike riders usually have enough accidents that they stop getting on the things. Bikes in themselves would probably be borderline illegal to sell if they were invented today, they don't look safe at all. And E-things are less safe again than ordinary bikes.

> OP's point was that if you invented something today that killed over a million people per year, it probably wouldn't be allowed, and I don't think that's really that controversial a statement.

I'm not replying to OP. I agree with him on this one and note that the implication of that is e-bikes are probably on their way towards being banned or restricted.

Re: Father claims Google's AI product fuelled son's delusional spiral

#272
post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The ability to talk to the model is the product not the text it generates, that is public domain (or maybe the user owns still up for debate) Models can't "convince" or "encourage" anything, people can, they can roleplay like models can, they can play pretend so the companies they hate so much get their comeuppance. This is clearly tool misuse, look at how gemini is advertised vs this user using it to generate pseudo…

What do you mean models can't encourage anything? You've never heard of the term "words of encouragement"?
Post reply on HN