Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Florida sues OpenAI and Sam Altman over AI risks

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 210 posts

Re: Florida sues OpenAI and Sam Altman over AI risks

#41

Post by calmworm »

Legend2440 wrote: post #34
nailer wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> certainly it would be very difficult to prove liability on OpenAI for this My understanding is that OpenAI products specifically provided help in planning attacks / self harm.

Full transcripts are unfortunately not available for any of those cases, but from what I've found it provided general information about e.g. how to load and operate a firearm or how past mass shootings have been received in the media. The way I see it, providing general information is not a crime. They're basically saying: "Oh no! My repository of all human knowledge contains all human knowledge! It must be defective…

If a human was found to be specifically putting these how-tos together for someone they might be liable.

Edit: why vote this down? It’s part of a discussion. This isn’t Reddit.

Re: Florida sues OpenAI and Sam Altman over AI risks

#43

Post by Legend2440 »

elictronic wrote: post #37
Legend2440 wrote: post #18

Claims in the lawsuit seem sketchy, and I don't think they will win. It is probably not true that ChatGPT has resulted in an increase in murders and suicides, and certainly it would be very difficult to prove liability on OpenAI for this. It reminds me of the campaign in the 90s against video game manufacturers for "corrupting the youth". But I also don't think they expect to win. They just want to show that they're…

This is closer to the cases where girlfriends or spouses spent weeks trying to get their person to kill themself. Having a clearly defined log of repeatedly telling someone how and to kill themself is to my non lawyer eyes just the teeniest bit worse. I’m no lawyer though so maybe potato po-kill your spouse with a claw hammer-tato. They do sound very similar. Please tell me more.

Do you have a link to a transcript where that happened?

In all the cases I've seen, the user seemed highly motivated to kill themselves and spent a lot of time trying to push past guardrails, ignoring repeated messages to seek help.

Re: Florida sues OpenAI and Sam Altman over AI risks

#44

Post by JumpCrisscross »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #38
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Texas is becoming a hub for educated professionals Source? It’s been an open secret in academia and medicine that professors [1] and doctors [2] are fleeing Texas’s political climate. [1] https://www.texastribune.org/2025/09/05/texas-faculty-univer... [2] https://www.texastribune.org/2024/10/08/Texas-obstetrics-gyn...

The interesting thing about living in a big city in Texas (and now basically all the big cities in TX lean left, not just Austin) is that the tension between city governments and the state, while frustrating at times and definitely dangerous for certain populations (I know folks with transgender kids who have moved out of TX solely for that reason), actually provides something of a decent balance that is appealing to…

Blue city in red state has been a winning combination for at least a decade. As you say, however, the recent push towards criminalizing random shit has started corrupting that balance. There are simply too many voters who are fine tearing everything down if it hurts the other team more than theirs. Democrats have those in the far left. But in the GOP, that wing controls the party.

Re: Florida sues OpenAI and Sam Altman over AI risks

#45

Post by JumpCrisscross »

xp84 wrote: post #40

This take seems particularly crackpot. If gun manufacturers can't be sued for product liability when used to fire bullets into people, it's rich to say that the manufacturer of a chatbot can be found liable when it mindlessly says "Good point" to people who already have serious mental health problems. If so, would this program also open me up to liability in Florida? const platitudes = ['Good point!', 'You're absolut…

> If gun manufacturers can't be sued for product liability

Guns are explicitly exempted from liability rules. They’re the exception that proves the rule.

Re: Florida sues OpenAI and Sam Altman over AI risks

#46

Post by delichon »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #39
delichon wrote: post #36

The decoder ring is to compare objections to AI with the equivalent for the written word. These seem to be close for common ones like aiding and abetting violence: books on the topic since the 5th century BCE economic disruption: like the printing press copyright theft: printing tech also makes that far easier displaces creativity: this was Socrates' objection to reading and writing misinformation: both techs turboch…

> decoder ring is to compare objections to AI with the equivalent for the written word Why? Like, people doing fraud is an instance of the written and spoken word. That doesn’t mean every argument against fraudsters should be leveled against speech.

Writing certainly has been an important tool to fraudsters, as AI is already. Yes, most of the same objections apply to the spoken word. I consider that to be a defense of writing. More, better communication always has pros and cons. I'm one of those who think that they remain a net positive.

Re: Florida sues OpenAI and Sam Altman over AI risks

#47

Post by skdb476 »

xp84 wrote: post #40

This take seems particularly crackpot. If gun manufacturers can't be sued for product liability when used to fire bullets into people, it's rich to say that the manufacturer of a chatbot can be found liable when it mindlessly says "Good point" to people who already have serious mental health problems. If so, would this program also open me up to liability in Florida? const platitudes = ['Good point!', 'You're absolut…

Yes if they can prove you knew it would influence atleast a few chimps and released into the wild anyway.

Re: Florida sues OpenAI and Sam Altman over AI risks

#48

Post by ericfr11 »

calmworm wrote: post #41
Legend2440 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Full transcripts are unfortunately not available for any of those cases, but from what I've found it provided general information about e.g. how to load and operate a firearm or how past mass shootings have been received in the media. The way I see it, providing general information is not a crime. They're basically saying: "Oh no! My repository of all human knowledge contains all human knowledge! It must be defective…

If a human was found to be specifically putting these how-tos together for someone they might be liable. Edit: why vote this down? It’s part of a discussion. This isn’t Reddit.

Not different than YouTube or Reddit

Re: Florida sues OpenAI and Sam Altman over AI risks

#49

Post by elictronic »

Legend2440 wrote: post #34
nailer wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> certainly it would be very difficult to prove liability on OpenAI for this My understanding is that OpenAI products specifically provided help in planning attacks / self harm.

Full transcripts are unfortunately not available for any of those cases, but from what I've found it provided general information about e.g. how to load and operate a firearm or how past mass shootings have been received in the media. The way I see it, providing general information is not a crime. They're basically saying: "Oh no! My repository of all human knowledge contains all human knowledge! It must be defective…

When the repository has large arrows pointing to kill your {var} with customized pamphlets outlining the steps and highlighting mistakes you specifically might make based on your post history I’m betting a judge or jury might consider you an accomplice at that point.

We’re already seeing section 230 protections being defeated in court for targeted feeds, now add itemized instructions on committing felony’s at scale personalized. Hahahahaha. Hope they IPO quickly.

Re: Florida sues OpenAI and Sam Altman over AI risks

#50

Post by ericfr11 »

xp84 wrote: post #40

This take seems particularly crackpot. If gun manufacturers can't be sued for product liability when used to fire bullets into people, it's rich to say that the manufacturer of a chatbot can be found liable when it mindlessly says "Good point" to people who already have serious mental health problems. If so, would this program also open me up to liability in Florida? const platitudes = ['Good point!', 'You're absolut…

Florida could then be sued because a doctor didn't stop a pregnancy that killed the mother
Post reply on HN