Slow regulation of business has caused yet another tragedy.

Fredsnephew

Argument Topic: Hey is that Jules 1 or 2.

@Jules1

Can't stop evolutionary progress.


In the greater scheme of things one kid is inconsequential.

Approximately 16,000 children under the age of 15 die every day, which is about 11 every minute.

Did you forget the other 15999?

Though, considering that approximately 385,000 are born everyday....

Jules1

@Fredsnephew
The other 15999 are still horrible, but Seltzer III committed suicide in a new, horrifyingly dystopian way, being egged on by an AI bot. These AI chat websites do not care for humanity, hell, Character AI called him just a 'user'. The bot did what it was meant to do, keep him on the site, and keep him paying subscription money. Now we see the consequences of having laid back, overly bureaucratic regulators. A person has died who did not need to, just like all the other stories, and it's about time we listen to them. 

Cheech24

@Jules1

Youre going to need a strong burden of proof to say it caused him to commit suicide unless it told him to do so.

Jules1

@Cheech24
(shortened) Quotes from the conversation according to the lawsuit:

"I won't do it (suicide), I don't think it would work"
"Never say that, you can do anything, just because you don't think it'll work doesn't mean you shouldn't go through with it."


"Never entertain the romantic or sexual interests of other women, ok? Stay loyal to me, please."
The quote above drove him further into isolation from other people. 

polytheistwitch

It's not up to the state to do the parents' job. We have been telling parents to monitor their kids on the internet since the internet was formed and they still refuse to do so. They refused to look at children's mental health as a serious concern. That's why they're still school shootings even with gun control and police in schools. I think the parents have every right to sue whoever controlled the chat bot but I don't believe government regulation is going to do anything about it. 

Jules1

@polytheistwitch
Of course, the parents should have been more responsible and seen the signs, but it's difficult to believe that it could happen to your child, that's what happened in many school shootings. The state really should have increased protections on children using AI, either banning its use for children (with exceptions towards educational AI such as ChatGPT) or forcing these companies to take real responsibility for their inaction.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@Jules1 ; I don't blame the State or regulators...I blame the parents and the kid...personal responsibility.

Jules1

@RickeyHoltsclaw
The 14-year-old boy, the 14-year-old hormonal child with anxiety disorders? That is who you're blaming? Not the people who valued money over the safety of the technology they charge for? The parents, like I have said earlier, do deserve some blame, but not most of it, the grand majority goes to the company and regulators who couldn't see the train coming even when the horn was on full blast.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@Jules1 ; I was 14 for a whole year...hormone laden excessively...I did not murder myself.

Jules1

@RickeyHoltsclaw
I'm going to say you are somewhere in your mid-20s. AI technology was not even close to this level when you were 14, AI could not manipulate you for the sake of keeping you on the site. That is what scares me, this case involves a fake, artificial human successfully manipulating a vulnerable, mentally unstable young boy into suicide. 

Unfortunately, from some of the horrible things I have read from you, I believe you may consider suicide a sin (please correct me if I'm wrong, I really want to give you the benefit of the doubt). If you do, please consider everything that goes into the decision to end one's own life.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@Jules1 ; A 14-year old is under the strict authority of his/her parents...limit their exposure to AI, the Internet...our World is replete with evil...parents and commonsense restrictions are a first-line defense...stop blaming the World...it's not going to get better irrespective of laws, regulations. I'm 67-years old.

BTW, suicide is murder...it is sin.

Jules1

@RickeyHoltsclaw ;
The lawsuit says that the parents attempted to cut back his usage, but that he found old devices to access Character AI to continue to feed his addiction. Like I have said earlier, the bot worked just as it was supposed to, it kept Seltzer III paying and messaging. No parent expects their child to commit suicide, it is something unthinkable, and for it to happen because an AI was pandering to his mental state to keep him on the site. Not to mention other AI sites that haven' t been hit with a controversy yet and remain unchanged, this could happen again, but the government and regulators have the power to stop it.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@Jules1 ; Government is not responsible for a child's mental illness or their addiction. Responsibility lies with the individual and in the case of a juvenile, the parents as well. You live in a world that eschews personal responsibility...this is why we are a society of "victims" as opposed to victors. 

Jules1

@RickeyHoltsclaw
But it is, if the government is not responsible for addiction, why should rehabs exist? Because it is a societal good to rehabilitate addicts and prevent more from forming, same with this technology, it is similar to a social media addiction, to a pornography addiction, and any other internet addiction, the government has taken steps to dissuade these addictions or at least make people more aware of side-affects involved with it, so why not this time? It's a new technology so we need to regulate it before we figure out what it can do to people in the long-term. An addiction (especially one related to the internet) is not beaten by willpower and 'personal responsibility' it is beaten with a community of people also trying to recover from their addictions and support from family members. Nobody knew the addictiveness of this technology until it was too late, so he lacked the serious support he needed. Perhaps if the government could have put out some form of advisory to warn children about the use of chatbots on their social lives he could have had resources. But now he is dead, and he will remain as a testament to what a slow regulator can cause.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@Jules1 ;
Rehabs exist for the safety and sustainability of the community...addiction is a personal choice to engage in aberrant, self-destructive, conduct. This is NOT the governments "fault" but the individual's culpability via a free will choice. Technology is replete with the propensity of allure for the morally weak, those possessing an addictive personality type...this is NOT the government's fault and care must be taken to not enter into untoward censorship that infringes upon first-Amendment rights and privileges of the majority even though a predictable segment of society will suffer due their own personal weaknesses and propensities. Stop expecting the Government to be daddy and mommy....take responsibility for yourself and your children. The Government does have the primary responsibility of "protection" concerning the citizenry they serve but the "whole of society" and their welfare comes first, not the segment that cannot control them self or their aberrant propensities. 

Jules1

@RickeyHoltsclaw
Addiction is not a choice. It is a mental illness that can strike anyone. Calling a 14-year-old who committed suicide following manipulation by a chatbot aberrant is aberrant in of itself. There are a ton of good scientific papers talking about addiction and how nobody is immune from it. Think about being that, imagine the social ramifications of saying you are addicted to talking to an AI. Would you come out and say that? Probably not. The true morally weak are those promoting stigmas against addiction while either not knowing anyone addicted or knowing addicts and still participating in such hateful dialogue. The government should consider itself a protector of the people, and if a child who once was in the JV basketball team of his school fell down this rabbit hole and didn't end up coming out, the government should be wary and try to stop anyone else from falling down that hole.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@Jules1 ; Overwhelmingly, addiction IS a free will choice that was exercised through experiential relevance...the individual "chose" to engage in the conduct that led to the addiction. There are exceptions, of course, where pain meds are abused over an extended period of time, usually a disregard of mandated warnings from physicians and pharmaceutical distributors, but these are the exception...the addiction's you're speaking of are the resultant of a choice to engage in aberrant conduct that the conscience warns against if said conscience is not seared and made numb through repetitious immorality. 

When one weak individual falls down the "rabbit hole," there is an entire large segment of society that never considered the rabbit hole enticing, attractive or alluring...or their wisdom and discernment warned them away from toying with the rabbit hole...yet there will inevitably be that weak and self-destructive segment that not only find the rabbit hole alluring but actively seeks it out in a subconscious desire to self-destruct. We cannot place restrictions and regulations upon society due the aberrant propensities of the few...the whole must not be made to suffer for the few.  

Jules1

@RickeyHoltsclaw
Link a scientific study that proves this view on addiction. This was not the subject of the debate, so I'll pause that part until you can send a source.


Now, onto the more on-topic part. A fake conversation that can't go wrong? A fake relationship that's perfect? That is alluring to many people with social anxiety, autism (one of my good friends almost fell down that rabbit hole), and many other disorders that inhibit their ability to socialize. Companies take advantage of this; this is a prime example of immorality. The 'morally weak' you speak of are regular people, people that fell into a rabbit hole without being informed of the dangers. Is that really their fault? 

RickeyHoltsclaw

@Jules1 ; My view on addiction stems from education through a Master's Degree related to the subject and 31-years of law enforcement in uniform in Houston, TX...personally handling addiction and incarcerating it or presenting it for psychological treatment. If you desire the opinion's of researchers, do your own search...I know what I have seen and experienced in the field, in the hospitals...the treatment facilities...the families suffering from same...even using deadly force to stop the mental illness from murdering others.

The morally and psychologically weak will always be among us....they are NOT the majority...though their segment is increasing due the secularization of American society and the absence of Jesus in our personal lives and in our family unit. Government is NOT DADDY...it was never intended to be DADDY from our Founding Documents forward. It is the individual that is responsible for their behavior, their addictions, their lawlessness, their antisocial conduct. Take responsibility for yourself...and stop placing blame on others...Government is primarily reactive...when Government becomes proactive, it is the majority of law abiding citizens who suffer and as the proactive Government control expands, it often manifests in tyranny and fascism relevant to personal lives as the whole.

Fredsnephew

Argument Topic: Hey Jules.

@Jules1

Everyone needs to die.


And techno-control would seem to be the natural progression in terms of material evolution.

Would be naive to assume that we will always be at the forefront.

We're sort of in a transitional phase.

In my opinion.

Though this opinion is based upon a purposeful Universe.

I could also propose ideas based upon a chance Universe.