zlacker

Playing devils advocate for a moment - have you ever had a cigarette? It does plenty of good for the user. In fact, I think we do make this risk calculation that you describe in the exact same way - there are plenty of substances that are so toxic to humanity that we make them illegal to own or consume or produce, and the presence of these in your body can sometimes even risk employment, let alone death.

We know the risks from cigarettes, but it offers tangible benefits to its users, so they continue to use the product. So too cars and emotionally manipulative AI's, I imagine.

(None of this negates your overall point, but I do think the initial tobacco comparison is very apt.)

>>alxjrv+(OP)
> We know the risks from cigarettes

Hmm, the tobacco industry is also famous for actively trying to deny and suppress evidence about its harms. They actively didn't want people to be in a position to make a fully informed decision. In cases where jurisdictions introduced policies that packaging etc had to carry factual information about health risks, the tobacco industry pushed back.

>>abeppu+l1
Wholeheartedly agreed!

Please don't mistake my post as an endorsement of the tobacco industry - I was only saying that while we do not have extensive proof of the dangers of social AI, wink-and-nodding at the audience about AI intimacy (sexual or otherwise) strikes me as irresponsible, and so I thought the tobacco comparison was apt.