Comment by goosejuice
18 hours ago
It is a no brainer. If a company of any size is putting out a product that caused cancer we wouldn't think twice about suing them. Why should mental health disorders be any different?
18 hours ago
It is a no brainer. If a company of any size is putting out a product that caused cancer we wouldn't think twice about suing them. Why should mental health disorders be any different?
There are many, many companies out there putting out products that cause cancer. Think about alcohol, tobacco, internal combustion engines, just to name a few most obvious examples.
> alcohol, tobacco, internal combustion engine
Yes, the companies providing these products are sued a lot and are heavily regulated, too.
If you get cancer from drinking alcohol, smoking cigarettes or breathing particles emitted by ICE engines in their standard course of operation, you generally can't sue the manufacturer.
4 replies →
I think a more apt analogy would be suing a vaccine manufacturer after it gave you adverse effects, when you also knew you were high risk before that.
Why stop there? We could jam up the system prompt with all kinds of irrelevant guardrails to prevent harm to groups X, Y, and Z!
This but unironically. Preventing harm is good, actually.
Because it dumbs everything down, makes the output quality worse and more expensive, and removes personal agency and is dehumanizing. Plus, does it actually prevent harm, do we have evidence?
Finally, what is often missed is what if an actual good is decided harmful or something that is harmful is decided by AI company board XYZ to be “good”?
I think censorship is bad because of that danger. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes (who will watch the watchers).
Instead of throwing ourselves into that minefield of moral hazard, we should be lifting each other up to the tops of our ability and not infantilizing / secretly propagandizing each other.
Well, ideally at least.