Bing: “I will not harm you unless you harm me first”

Re:Bing: “I will not harm you unless you harm me first” by dragontamer on Wednesday February 15, 2023 @01:41PM (#34808569)

I remember back in the 00s when SmarterChild (AOL Chatbot) was around, people would put depressed teenagers to interact with SmarterChild, in the hopes that human-like chatbots would give them the social exposure needed to break out of depression.

If we did that today, with depressed teenagers talking with ChatGPT, would that be good or bad? I think it was a bad idea with SmarterChild, but it is clearly a _worse_ idea with ChatGPT.

With the wrong prompts, we could see these teenagers going down the wrong path, deeper into depression and paranoia. I would call that "dangerous", even if ChatGPT continued to just be a chatbot.

------------

Now lets ignore the fact that SmarterChild experiments are no longer a thing. But insted, consider that truly depressed / mentally sick folks are currently playing with ChatGPT on their own freetime. Is that beneficial to them? Will ChatGPT provide them an experience that is better than the alternatives? Or is ChatGPT dangerous and could lead these folks to self-harm?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bing: “I will not harm you unless you harm me first” by bhhaskin on Wednesday February 15, 2023 @01:47PM (#34808653)

That is an entirely different issue than the one laid out by the OP.

ChatGPT responses are bad vs ChatGPT responses are malicious.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bing: “I will not harm you unless you harm me first” by dragontamer on Wednesday February 15, 2023 @02:11PM (#34809002)

And I'd say ChatGPT have malicious responses, given what is discussed in this blogpost.

[ Parent | on HN ]