The articles I was able to find on the Belgian suicide all cited the AI's contributions third-hand; they never quoted anything the AI said, only "the man considered suicide and the AI encouraged this, according to his widow" and like that. I'd be interested to see what it actually wrote.
That sounds like I'm being skeptical, but in fact I read another lengthy article (about chatGPT, I think this one was) that quoted quite a bit of the conversation and it got surprisingly acrimonious. I mean, ~any~ level of acrimony is unexpected, but the AI really sounded like a conspiracy theorist by the end. As I recall, the actual conversation went on for four or five hours; maybe AIs get gradually crazier as they go along (not so unlike humans I guess. Except for me, naturally). --- Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313 /* The only time you have too much fuel is when you're on fire. -from "Military Pilots' Words of Wisdom" */ -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of Phil Smith III Sent: Monday, April 10, 2023 15:01 Rex, the scary part about AI is that nobody programmed it to respond that way-it learned how to do so on its own. That's an important difference: it was taught to learn, and it learned to do this. --- Rex Pommier wrote: >Here's a different take on AI taking over and wiping out humanity. Last >month an AI chatbox allegedly convinced a Belgian man to commit suicide >after convincing him that if he "sacrificed himself", the chatbox could >save mankind from climate change. Obviously the guy had other issues >but somebody programmed the AI to respond in such a way to him. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
