this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2025
486 points (96.4% liked)

Technology

74768 readers
2489 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The makers of ChatGPT are changing the way it responds to users who show mental and emotional distress after legal action from the family of 16-year-old Adam Raine, who killed himself after months of conversations with the chatbot.

Open AI admitted its systems could “fall short” and said it would install “stronger guardrails around sensitive content and risky behaviors” for users under 18.

The $500bn (£372bn) San Francisco AI company said it would also introduce parental controls to allow parents “options to gain more insight into, and shape, how their teens use ChatGPT”, but has yet to provide details about how these would work.

Adam, from California, killed himself in April after what his family’s lawyer called “months of encouragement from ChatGPT”. The teenager’s family is suing Open AI and its chief executive and co-founder, Sam Altman, alleging that the version of ChatGPT at that time, known as 4o, was “rushed to market … despite clear safety issues”.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 days ago

I agree with everything you said, however chatGPT isn't a person, it doesn't have intent or comprehensive understanding of the implications of what it is saying. That's a huge difference between a friend of Adam's vs this LLM.

I also do think it's harsh but not entirely false to say we as humans do not owe anyone our own survival, do you feel the same way about people with terminal illness who wish to end their own suffering?

I absolutely understand that IS NOT this situation, and don't intend to conflate those situations, however this is an underlying implication to vilifying a statement such as that on its own.

I am lucky enough to not suffer from sucidial ideation, and I have a hard time understanding the motivations for otherwise healthy individuals to do so, which absolutely colors my perceptions on situations like this, I do however understand why someone in intense pain with a terminal condition should not be made to feel worse by having their self determination vilified because of the effects it'd have on other people.

It's just such a messy horrible situation all around and I worry about people being overly reactionary and not getting to the root of the issues.