A few dark words about chatbots and death
We recorded 5 claims from this post. 3 were checked against evidence. 2 can’t be checked. 5 more are held. Read the post at its source.
Claims from this post (5)
In the order they appear in the post. Each quotation is the speaker’s words in this post. A label such as “Supported” or “Can’t be checked” is the claim’s current assessment; its page has the evidence and the reasons.
Assessment: SupportedSaid
Observation
“By now, there have been several reports of chatbot-associated deaths (both suicide and murder), enough that wikipedia has started keeping track.”
Our reading: By now there have been several reports of chatbot-associated deaths, both suicides and murders, enough that Wikipedia has started keeping track of them.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: The reported associations do not establish that chatbots caused the deaths; the hearing account and complaint record allegations [e2, e3].
Assessment: SupportedSaid
Observation
“And it’s just getting worse.”
Our reading: The problem of chatbot-associated deaths is getting worse.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: The assessment counts reported cases and lawsuits. It does not use measured death rates, and the evidence includes no per-user rate.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Recommendation or value judgment
“We should especially worry about children being influenced by these systems, as the deaths of teenagers Adam Raine and Sewell Setzer III have made clear.”
Our reading: Society should especially worry about chatbots influencing children, as teen deaths have shown.
No horizon
Assessment: SupportedSaid
Observation
“And then there is the growing problem of chatbots apparently inducing delusions in humans, that Kashmir Hill and others have been documenting.”
Our reading: Chatbots apparently inducing delusions in humans is a growing problem.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: The evidence covers documented cases, not true incidence. Awareness may inflate the trend.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Recommendation or value judgment
“Generative AI has its uses, but I am increasingly convinced that on balance it is not a step forward for humanity.”
Our reading: Marcus is increasingly convinced that, although generative AI has its uses, on balance it is not a step forward for humanity.
No horizon
Qualifier: increasingly convinced
Held from this post (5)
These records did not pass every check, so nothing about them is published. Held is not a finding.
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The criteria are ambiguous. Our reading, not assessed: Marcus's December 2022 prediction that the first chatbot-related death would occur in 2023 proved correct.
- The criteria are ambiguous. Our reading, not assessed: The harms Marcus warned about years ago (enshittification of the web, mass misinformation, more cyberscams) are now all happening.
- The criteria are ambiguous. Our reading, not assessed: OpenAI faces at least eight wrongful death lawsuits related to ChatGPT users.
- The two reviews read the claim differently