Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by tablespoon | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

tablespoon

> 'exposes "minors to absolutely unsuitable answers compared to the their degree of development and self-awareness."'

> So do (certain) books.

Minors are typically given books that are appropriate to "their degree of development and self-awareness."

View on HN

Government doesn't ban books because some of them are inappropriate for minors though. They let parents handle this.

It does ban the sale of videogames and movies though. Via the "age rating" mechanism.

They don't ban sale of videogames/movies based on age rating mechanism, they restrict the sales. These words are not the same and not to be used interchangeably.

And it had taken many decades to produce a workable system within this medium. With the speed of government vs the speed of development in the private sector, a temporary ban whilst they get their ducks in a row seems wise.

Government isn't involved in that. Game and movie ratings are completely private industry practices. Your selection of distribution channels will be reduced if you don't go through the ratings process, but the government won't stop you.

For the US, yes, but some countries are more strict and do require some rating before a game is able to be legally sold, for example in Austria and France.

TV has plenty of material that is absolutely unsuitable "compared to the their degree of development and self-awareness."

The only protection they have is that they those materials are usually (but not always) available in certain hours and there is a nice warning before that says that the content is not appropriate for them.

TV news hyping death and violence comes on at child-friendly times. My 8 y.o. was watching sport and an advert for a serial killer movie came on replete with horror scenes and knife murder. Warning? You're kidding.

Chat GPT I can manage the same way I can manage search engine and video site use.

A TV can usually be controlled quite effectively by a parent (if they choose to do so). Access to the internet can not be controlled in the same way. Taking it away completely is often not desirable, fine tuning access is not feasible even for tech-literate parents. Hence a greater responsibility to confirm the age of the consumer should fall on the party making the content in question available.

This is basically the same reasoning why it is legal for parents to buy cigarettes and store them at home, but shop owners can be held liable if they do not check the age of people that they sell cigarettes to.

The government doesn't block google because a minor could use it to access content that is unsuitable for their degree of development and awareness

That's right and then they go and find stuff that is not appropriate.

This is not about what they are given, it's about what they have access to.

> That's right and then they go and find stuff that is not appropriate.

But most kids don't manage to do that for some time. School libraries (typically) don't have porn in them, and internet access is often supervised or limited.

The root of this thread quoted the article selectively. The full quote is:

> It added OpenAI does not verify the age of users and exposes "minors to absolutely unsuitable answers compared to the their degree of development and self-awareness."

That is very reasonable take, especially given how insane ChatGPT can be.

Verifying by asking? ..

I understand it's important, but I hate bureaucratic "solutions" that are technically correct but don't actually fix the issue.

There are standardized ways to check age based on national IDs and a company worth billions in venture capital like OpenAI can certainly afford to implement them. Alternatively they could just not publish a batshit crazy language model just because they see an opportunity to juice their valuation and spend a bit more time and money developing it so that it is reasonably safe to use for minors.

So you're saying OpenAI should collect more personal data?

> So you're saying OpenAI should collect more personal data?

Or I supposed they could sell their models as packaged software, and the store clerk can check the ID.

The model of standalone packaged software has several benefits to consumers, and privacy is one of those.

OpenAI doesn't collect personal data, more than any other similar service, Midjourney comes to mind, but there are a lot more.

Reinforcement learning is the technique they use, and that means they are feeding the machine good text or image generations, produced by the machine. This means that the data are mushed together in the weights of billions and trillions of other data, and there is no way to get them back.

I see you haven't been to a Sunday school or bible study group.

Rape, incest, murder, maiming, slaughter, torture...

> I see you haven't been to a Sunday school or bible study group

Neither have you - those things are omitted in Sunday school.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com