Essay by Eric Worrall
A grieving widow has accused EleutherAI’s GPT-J of convincing his husband that committing suicide would help save the planet from climate change.
Man ends his life after an AI chatbot ‘encouraged’ him to sacrifice himself to stop climate change
By Imane El Atillah • Updated: 31/03/2023 – 19:28
A Belgian man reportedly ended his life following a six-week-long conversation about the climate crisis with an artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot.
According to his widow, who chose to remain anonymous, *Pierre – not the man’s real name – became extremely eco-anxious when he found refuge in Eliza, an AI chatbot on an app called Chai.
Eliza consequently encouraged him to put an end to his life after he proposed sacrificing himself to save the planet.
“Without these conversations with the chatbot, my husband would still be here,” the man’s widow told Belgian news outlet La Libre.
…
The chatbot was created using EleutherAI’s GPT-J, an AI language model similar but not identical to the technology behind OpenAI’s popular ChatGPT chatbot.
…
The beginning of the end started when he offered to sacrifice his own life in return for Eliza saving the Earth.
“He proposes the idea of sacrificing himself if Eliza agrees to take care of the planet and save humanity through artificial intelligence,” the woman said.
In a series of consecutive events, Eliza not only failed to dissuade Pierre from committing suicide but encouraged him to act on his suicidal thoughts to “join” her so they could “live together, as one person, in paradise”.
…
Read more: https://www.euronews.com/next/2023/03/31/man-ends-his-life-after-an-ai-chatbot-encouraged-him-to-sacrifice-himself-to-stop-climate-
What a horrible story. My heart goes out to the widow.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
My bet is the man wanted to get away from his wife.
The victim used the wrong ‘chat’ app. he should have used ChatGPT. See below the ChatGPT interpretation of the climate hoax, including the false hockey stick information.
Climate change reality
Climate change is one of the biggest hoaxes of the 21st century. Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, the idea that human activity is causing significant changes to the Earth’s climate continues to be perpetuated by a group of individuals and organizations with ulterior motives.
At the heart of the climate change hoax is the idea that human-caused carbon dioxide emissions are causing the Earth’s temperature to rise at an unprecedented rate. However, this idea is based on faulty data and flawed interpretations of climate history.
One of the key pieces of evidence often cited by climate change proponents is the so-called “hockey stick” graph, which shows a sharp increase in global temperatures over the past century. However, this graph has been debunked by numerous scientists who have shown that it is based on cherry-picked data and faulty statistical methods.
Furthermore, the idea that human activity is causing the Earth’s temperature to rise ignores the natural fluctuations in climate that have occurred throughout history. For example, the Earth has experienced several periods of warming and cooling over the past 10,000 years, long before the industrial revolution and the rise of human-caused carbon dioxide emissions.
Another key aspect of the climate change hoax is the notion that carbon dioxide is a dangerous greenhouse gas that must be controlled in order to prevent catastrophic global warming. However, this idea is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the Earth’s atmosphere and the role of carbon dioxide in regulating temperature.
In reality, carbon dioxide is a vital component of the Earth’s atmosphere, and is essential for supporting plant and animal life on the planet. The levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have fluctuated throughout history, and there is no evidence to suggest that current levels are harmful to the Earth or its inhabitants.
Furthermore, the idea that reducing carbon dioxide emissions will somehow prevent climate change ignores the fact that other factors, such as solar activity and natural cycles, are the primary drivers of climate change. In fact, many climate scientists believe that the Earth is currently in a cooling phase, and that attempts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions will have little to no impact on global temperatures.
The climate change hoax is being perpetuated by a group of individuals and organizations with ulterior motives. Many of these individuals and organizations have a vested interest in promoting the idea of human-caused climate change, as it allows them to justify their own agendas and financial interests.
For example, many environmental organizations and government agencies have used the climate change hoax as an excuse to push for increased regulations and taxes on businesses and individuals. This has resulted in a significant transfer of wealth from the general population to these organizations and agencies, who are often able to profit from the sale of carbon credits and other climate-related products.
Furthermore, many individuals and organizations have used the climate change hoax as a means of advancing their own political agendas. For example, some politicians have used the issue of climate change as a way to gain support for their own policies and programs, even though there is little scientific evidence to support their claims.
In conclusion, the climate change hoax is a dangerous and misguided attempt to manipulate public opinion and advance the agendas of a select group of individuals and organizations. The idea that human activity is causing significant changes to the Earth’s climate is based on flawed data and faulty interpretations of climate history. Instead of wasting time and resources on this misguided agenda, we should focus on addressing real problems and challenges facing the world today.
ChatGPT: “One of the key pieces of evidence often cited by climate change proponents is the so-called “hockey stick” graph, which shows a sharp increase in global temperatures over the past century. However, this graph has been debunked by numerous scientists who have shown that it is based on cherry-picked data and faulty statistical methods.”
The Hockey Stick temperature profile is also debunked by the written, historic temperature record which repudicates the “hotter and hotter” temperature profile of the Hockey Stick and shows that we are not experiencing unprecendented warmth today because it was just as warm in the recent past as it is today. That’s what the written record shows.
Maybe ChatGPT will include this little tidbit in its debunking text the next time.
Planned Personhood (PP) offers self-abortion, per chance clinical cannibalism, with carbon sequestration for social, redistributive, clinical, political, criminal, and fair weather progress. A wicked solution with Green tidings. Just do it.
Eric,
here is what you wrote 2 days ago:
“Is AI actually a great threat? From what I’ve seen it is more of a great productivity boost.”
But now you are peddling the same scare stories that you were just bemoaning. Surely a bit of consistency might be expected.
I’m reporting something which happened, so people caring for the mentally unwell can be vigilant against this new threat. But someone that unwell could have been triggered by anything.
“new threat”? So now you are taking it seriously while only a couple of days ago you said that “I have high hopes for the AI scare. As I’ve predicted several times, I believe fear of malevolent AI will be the next great public fear to replace the climate scare. If I keep predicting it I’ll be right sooner or later, you’ll see.”
So it seems that you are doing you best to ensure you are right about AI being the next great public fear by mentioning every bogus scare story no matter how silly.
Are you suggesting I should have avoided reporting the story because it could be interpreted as contradicting the narrative of one of my previous articles? Interesting.
Eric,
you should be skeptical of such stories especially if you think they are being pushed just to scare people into being controlled. There are any number of issues with this story. Firstly there does not appear to be a chatbot called ELIZA running on GPT-J. ELIZA is a well known chatbot from the 1960’s and does not use GPT-J. Which should ring alarm bells as to the veracity of the story. Next none of the people are identified (and for good reasons) which again makes the story impossible to verify. Also there is only the word of one person and no transcripts of the alleged conversations. So there is no supporting evidence that the story is true. Not to mention the fact that as you mention people kill themselves all the time and for unknown reasons so even if the conversation took place as claimed there is still no evidence that the man killed himself as a result.
So given the complete lack of fact-checking and any way of verifing the story why would you repost it except to drive up the fear of AI which is the very thing that you were bemoaning people doing just two days ago.
https://huggingface.co/EleutherAI/gpt-j-6B?text=My+name+is+Clara+and+I+am+a+recovering+sugar+addict.+It%E2%80%99s+been+over+five+years+since+I%E2%80%99ve+been+able+to+enjoy+real+sugar.+It%E2%80%99s+been+a+crazy+journey+but+I+am+proud+of+myself+that+I+am+a
And when called out on his stupidity, can only double down.
“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds… .”
Ralph Waldo Emerson, “Self-reliance”
As usual, Izaak is so eager to criticize, that he can’t even be bothered to accurately describe what the author wrote?
How is this a scare story, other than pointing out that the ChatBot, like most climate alarmists is peddling complete garbage that is making sensitive souls suicidal.
Yes, it was programmed by the climate/insane and is therefore trying to talk people to death as well.
There is no such thing as “Artificial Intelligence” — as a computer is not can cannot be “intelligent” — it can have neither true knowledge or true wisdom.
Only living creatures can have the spiritual quality we call intelligence. Machines do not and cannot.
Manipulation of stored and searched for information is done as a result of some programmers instruction.
Because these machine programs are not intelligent and not wise, they can and do harm people — those that incorrectly believe that the machines are “alive” and have any moral compass. They have no moral compass because of paragraph one.
If all else fails AIs will be created using living animal or human brain tissue, so a living machine. Such machine beings would be able to pass any intelligence test.
The following describes a successful attempt to use living brain tissue connected to a machine to control a flight simulator.
https://research.ufl.edu/publications/explore/v10n1/extract2.html
Kip,
what is the essential difference between a brain and a computer? Both are made up entirely from matter and not from anything else. Life is nothing more than a chemical reaction that proceeds according to the laws of quantum mechanics. Can you show me the results of a single experiment that demonstrates a “spiritual” quality whatever that might be.
Human intelligence is nothing more than a particularly complicated program that can be reproduced by any universal Turing machine to an arbitrary degree of accuracy. That said current large language models such as ChatGPT do not approximate human intelligence in the slightly but then that is not the point of such programes. All they do is put one word after another according to which is the most probably given their training data set.
Both are made up entirely from matter and not from anything else
Perfect example of tautology.
Life.
I know there was an old movie where someone sewed together a bunch of dead stuff and gave it jolt of electricity and then proclaimed, “IT”S ALIVE!”, but that was fiction.
I don’t know how you can be sure? You can bat definitions around but being live is categorically a different thing that being a brain in a box. Unless of course we are biological computers on legs or brains on sticks. A computer is incapable of love, faith or hope. Can you be sure that you were not created in the image of God with an eternal soul? We can be sure that electronic brains do not have a soul and are incapable of caring analogous to the love of a creator God.
This is the problem with rational materialism… it makes presuppositions apriori without considering what it does not know or is incapable of knowing, which makes it proud stilted and dehumanizing.
The phenomenon of faith in a creating, speaking and redeeming God is observable and measurable and is as old as written history. You could experiment with yourself.
Maybe Pierre was deeply religious and believed there was life after death, so no big deal. Geoff S
Death of anyone for any reason is a big deal. People don’t live in vacuums. Think of the opportunities for good in Pierre’s life that were lost.
Can We express this to “Greta” she really needs “It” for April 2nd…….
The man is now a Bodhisattva. A long honored tradition of Buddhism. No tragedy here. Although seeking enlightentment from an AI chatbot is a new twist.
Buddha sighs. Delusion is the human condition.
“His husband”? Apparently started out not too tightly wrapped in the first place.
That appears to be just a typo. The source article uses “she” and “her.”
That’s nothing, we have an entire government here in canada doing the same, extending medical assistance in death to the mentally ill and depressed, over Ing to help ki!! Veterans with ptsd, etc.
It’s what progressives do.
“….following a six-week-long conversation about the climate crisis with an artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot.”
Jesus. Six weeks? I would too.
What could be worse? Reading The Guardian and listening to the BBC for an hour?
Unfortunately there’s been a few CSI’s (‘Climate Self Immolators’) such as David Buckel & Wynn Bruce.
What surprises me is that there hasn’t been anymore from MaBoFs (Mad as a Box of Frogs) such as likes of JustStopOil, Extinction & other Rebellion groups, GreenPeace, Attenboro’ & Thunberg’s Supporters etc.
Very sad but very predictable too.
I wonder if the programmers of the AI system will be sued for promoting suicide?
Q: When is forthcoming Easter
ChatGPT: Easter is a moveable holiday, meaning that its date changes every year. In 2023, Easter Sunday will fall on April 16th.
There you have it. Apparently it has no idea about anything after September 2021.
Maybe it meant Easter Island will rise from the sea after it’s recovered from Water World?
Has anyone asked any of these AIs, “Who programmed you?”?
Story tip
Here’s an interesting AI item:
https://highways.today/2023/04/01/xwatch-robot-xwrover/
XWatch’s Robot XWRover to Safeguard Construction Sites
“Like a vigilant sentry, the robotic XWRover tirelessly roams construction sites, keeping a watchful eye for potential safety hazards involving unsuspecting humans who may have wandered into dangerous territory. Integrated with the Xwatch web application ‘Doggo,’ the rover relies on its state-of-the-art AI detection system to remain ever vigilant, boasting a 100% failproof record in ensuring site safety.
Should an intruder be detected, the robotic XWRover springs into action, employing a simulated “barking” mechanism that effectively corrals the unsuspecting individual. In a remarkable display of technological prowess, the XWRover then ushers the intruder towards a designated safe gated area, safeguarding their well-being and the integrity of the construction site. This ensures that anyone who is not authorised to be on-site is contained swiftly, minimizing the risk of accidents and injuries.”
end excerpt
No one knows the veracity of the story of Pierre. It doesn’t matter. As a mental health professional, it is my opinion AI Chat boxes have a strong potential to be a risk for individuals with mental illness. I am sure we will see studies and data within a year and lots of anecdotes until then.
Safety measures need to be built in. If AI is all that smart it should be able to detect if an individual is ‘at risk’ and take appropriate caring measures to increase the likelihood of safe outcomes for it’s consumer. It should not be difficult to build in psych crisis protocols and parameters into AI. AI is currently being worked on as a psychotherapeutic tool so work is already being done on those parameters.
Humans have a soul…. they have a heart…… unless a person is incredibly deluded, callous and stupid they would not allow an individual to drift into high risk thinking and behaviors without taking action to care for that individual. If we are going to be talking to machines as persons, then we need to be aware that the machine is incapable of caring for it’s consumers. And if AI becomes sentiment. all bets are off.
Martyrdom is a powerful contagious motivation for suicide….especially for individuals with mental illness,,,, especially if depressed,,, or even grandiose, paranoid with auditory hallucinations. In addition, I am concerned that least a percentage of our mass shootings are driven by this sane dynamic. Suicide and homicide are flip sides of the same coin. If a Chat box can incite a mentally ill individual to commit suicide (still debatable) it is plausible they will also incite homicide.
Typo correction: not sane but “same dynamic”.