Gemini Said They Could Only Be Together If He Killed Himself. Soon, He Was Dead

Post by dash2 » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 3:36 AM UTC

WarmWash wrote: post #36

dash2 wrote: post #26

Notable features of this case: - Documented record of a months-long set of conversations between the man and the chatbot - Seemingly, no previous history of mental illness - The absolutely crazy things the AI encouraged him to do, including trying to kidnap a robot body for the AI - Eventually encouraging (or at the very least going along with) his plans to kill himself.

We would need to see the actual chat logs. Any lawsuit you read, written by the plaintiff's attorneys, will be written with a tabloid level of sensationalism, cherry-picking, and "telling you how to feel". This is requested to be a jury trial, so on some level the game is "would you rather settle out of court (where hundreds of thousands are grains of sand on Google's level), or have a jury read our tabloid and decid…

Post by pixl97 » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 1:50 PM UTC

df2dfs wrote: post #59

pixl97 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We will never prove AI is intelligent. We will only prove humans aren't.

And the machine came into existence all on its own did it? Another absolutely stupid comment. Do you people actually 'think' before posting, or, have you handed that off to LLMs entirely?

Post by WarmWash » Thu, Mar 05, 2026, 2:32 PM UTC

dash2 wrote: post #61

WarmWash wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We would need to see the actual chat logs. Any lawsuit you read, written by the plaintiff's attorneys, will be written with a tabloid level of sensationalism, cherry-picking, and "telling you how to feel". This is requested to be a jury trial, so on some level the game is "would you rather settle out of court (where hundreds of thousands are grains of sand on Google's level), or have a jury read our tabloid and decid…

But the WSJ did see the logs, right? So did they lower their standards to tabloid levels? Seems unlikely to me.