The makers of ChatGPT are changing the way it responds to users who show mental and emotional distress after legal action from the family of 16-year-old Adam Raine, who killed himself after months of conversations with the chatbot.

Open AI admitted its systems could “fall short” and said it would install “stronger guardrails around sensitive content and risky behaviors” for users under 18.

The $500bn (£372bn) San Francisco AI company said it would also introduce parental controls to allow parents “options to gain more insight into, and shape, how their teens use ChatGPT”, but has yet to provide details about how these would work.

Adam, from California, killed himself in April after what his family’s lawyer called “months of encouragement from ChatGPT”. The teenager’s family is suing Open AI and its chief executive and co-founder, Sam Altman, alleging that the version of ChatGPT at that time, known as 4o, was “rushed to market … despite clear safety issues”.

  • branno@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 days ago

    except OpenAI isn’t making a dime. they’re just burning money at a crazy rate.

    • kolorafa@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      46 minutes ago

      Fake news, CEO and all emplyes are getting pay’d in full, it doesn’t matter if they sell the product to its users or sell (user data) to their sponsors or share the data internaly, it doesnt matter that the service model itself is not profitable as they make the rest from selling a (fake?) promises.

      Same with many others like Youtube, they are also “not profitable” on paper as a standalone service. It only mean they are using you, selling your data or selling some promises.

      If they would actully not be profitable then they would rise prices or just disapear and some other company would arise but with srtategy that is at least sustainable.

      Open source devs can be losing money, as the pay from their own pockets.

      I would like to see at least one person in that company that is not getting money from it but fund it from own money.