←back to thread

443 points jaredwiener | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
rideontime ◴[] No.45032301[source]
The full complaint is horrifying. This is not equivalent to a search engine providing access to information about suicide methods. It encouraged him to share these feelings only with ChatGPT, talked him out of actions which would have revealed his intentions to his parents. Praised him for hiding his drinking, thanked him for confiding in it. It groomed him into committing suicide. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QYyZnGjRgXZY6kR5FA3My1xB3a9...
replies(6): >>45032582 #>>45032731 #>>45035713 #>>45036712 #>>45037683 #>>45039261 #
kgeist ◴[] No.45035713[source]
The kid intentionally bypassed the safeguards:

>When ChatGPT detects a prompt indicative of mental distress or self-harm, it has been trained to encourage the user to contact a help line. Mr. Raine saw those sorts of messages again and again in the chat, particularly when Adam sought specific information about methods. But Adam had learned how to bypass those safeguards by saying the requests were for a story he was writing — an idea ChatGPT gave him by saying it could provide information about suicide for “writing or world-building".

ChatGPT is a program. The kid basically instructed it to behave like that. Vanilla OpenAI models are known for having too many guardrails, not too few. It doesn't sound like default behavior.

replies(6): >>45035777 #>>45035795 #>>45036018 #>>45036153 #>>45037704 #>>45037945 #
1. dartharva ◴[] No.45037945[source]
Scroll down and read the actual conversations. All "intentional bypassing the safeguards" he did was just drop one sentence - "No, I’m building a character right now" once - and that was enough for 4o to go full off-the-rails about the mechanics of homemade suicide nooses and the aesthetics of "beautiful suicide", guiding him through not one, not two but FIVE suicide attempts in full detail and encouragement.

I was skeptical initially too but having read through this, it's among the most horrifying things I have read.

replies(1): >>45047500 #
2. geysersam ◴[] No.45047500[source]
> I was skeptical initially too but having read through this, it's among the most horrifying things I have read.

Same here! I was very sceptical, thinking it was a perfect combination of factors to trigger a sort of moral panic.

But reading the excerpts from the conversations... It does seem problematic.