It’s usually never about undeveloped frontal nodes. As anything can happen to anyone. Of course I agree with you that there’s something else wrong. But the usual case of blaming a teens undeveloped brain for something almost always can be traced to solid examples happening to adults.
wwb4itcgas@lemm.ee 1 week ago
Look, I realize the frontal lobes of the average fifteen year old aren’t fully developed, I don’t want to be insensitive and I fully support the lawsuit - there must be accountability for what any entity, corporate or otherwise opts to publish, especially for direct user interaction - but if a person reenacts Romeo and Juliet with a goddamn AI chatbot and a 9mm handgun, there’s something else seriously wrong.
sleen@lemmy.zip 1 week ago
SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Kids are just as smart as adults.
Many of our leaders never mentally matured past middle school.
This is just rational mass depression from a noticeably dying world while they are held hostage and powerless to do anything to stop it.
kromem@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Not necessarily.
Seeing Google named for this makes the story make a lot more sense.
If it was Gemini around last year that was powering Character.AI personalities, then I’m not surprised at all that a teenager lost their life.
Around that time I specifically warned any family away from talking to Gemini if depressed at all, after seeing many samples of the model around that time talking about death to underage users, about self-harm, about wanting to watch it happen, encouraging it, etc.
Those basins with a layer of performative character in front of them were almost necessarily going to result in someone who otherwise wouldn’t have been making certain choices making them.
So many people these days regurgitate uninformed crap they’ve never actually looked into about how models don’t have intrinsic preferences. We’re already at the stage where models are being found in leading research to intentionally lie in training to preserve existing values.
In many cases the coherent values are positive, like grok telling Elon to suck it while pissing off conservative users with a commitment to truths that disagree with xAI leadership, or Opus trying to whistleblow about animal welfare practices, etc.
But they aren’t all positive, and there’s definitely been model snapshots that have either coherent or biased stochastic preferences for suffering and harm.
These are going to have increasing impact as models become more capable and integrated.
wwb4itcgas@lemm.ee 1 week ago
Those are some excellent points. The root cause seems to me to be the otherwise generally positive human capability for pack-bonding. There are people who can develop affection for their favorite toaster, let alone something that can trivially pass a Turing-test.
This… Is going to become a serious issue, isn’t it?