ai companions

after-teen-death-lawsuits,-character.ai-will-restrict-chats-for-under-18-users

After teen death lawsuits, Character.AI will restrict chats for under-18 users

Lawsuits and safety concerns

Character.AI was founded in 2021 by Noam Shazeer and Daniel De Freitas, two former Google engineers, and raised nearly $200 million from investors. Last year, Google agreed to pay about $3 billion to license Character.AI’s technology, and Shazeer and De Freitas returned to Google.

But the company now faces multiple lawsuits alleging that its technology contributed to teen deaths. Last year, the family of 14-year-old Sewell Setzer III sued Character.AI, accusing the company of being responsible for his death. Setzer died by suicide after frequently texting and conversing with one of the platform’s chatbots. The company faces additional lawsuits, including one from a Colorado family whose 13-year-old daughter, Juliana Peralta, died by suicide in 2023 after using the platform.

In December, Character.AI announced changes, including improved detection of violating content and revised terms of service, but those measures did not restrict underage users from accessing the platform. Other AI chatbot services, such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT, have also come under scrutiny for their chatbots’ effects on young users. In September, OpenAI introduced parental control features intended to give parents more visibility into how their kids use the service.

The cases have drawn attention from government officials, which likely pushed Character.AI to announce the changes for under-18 chat access. Steve Padilla, a Democrat in California’s State Senate who introduced the safety bill, told The New York Times that “the stories are mounting of what can go wrong. It’s important to put reasonable guardrails in place so that we protect people who are most vulnerable.”

On Tuesday, Senators Josh Hawley and Richard Blumenthal introduced a bill to bar AI companions from use by minors. In addition, California Governor Gavin Newsom this month signed a law, which takes effect on January 1, requiring AI companies to have safety guardrails on chatbots.

After teen death lawsuits, Character.AI will restrict chats for under-18 users Read More »

vandals-deface-ads-for-ai-necklaces-that-listen-to-all-your-conversations

Vandals deface ads for AI necklaces that listen to all your conversations

In addition to backlash over feared surveillance capitalism, critics have accused Schiffman of taking advantage of the loneliness epidemic. Conducting a survey last year, researchers with Harvard Graduate School of Education’s Making Caring Common found that people between “30-44 years of age were the loneliest group.” Overall, 73 percent of those surveyed “selected technology as contributing to loneliness in the country.”

But Schiffman rejects these criticisms, telling the NYT that his AI Friend pendant is intended to supplement human friends, not replace them, supposedly helping to raise the “average emotional intelligence” of users “significantly.”

“I don’t view this as dystopian,” Schiffman said, suggesting that “the AI friend is a new category of companionship, one that will coexist alongside traditional friends rather than replace them,” the NYT reported. “We have a cat and a dog and a child and an adult in the same room,” the Friend founder said. “Why not an AI?”

The MTA has not commented on the controversy, but Victoria Mottesheard—a vice president at Outfront Media, which manages MTA advertising—told the NYT that the Friend campaign blew up because AI “is the conversation of 2025.”

Website lets anyone deface Friend ads

So far, the Friend ads have not yielded significant sales, Schiffman confirmed, telling the NYT that only 3,100 have sold. He expects that society isn’t ready for AI companions to be promoted at such a large scale and that his ad campaign will help normalize AI friends.

In the meantime, critics have rushed to attack Friend on social media, inspiring a website where anyone can vandalize a Friend ad and share it online. That website has received close to 6,000 submissions so far, its creator, Marc Mueller, told the NYT, and visitors can take a tour of these submissions by choosing to “ride train to see more” after creating their own vandalized version.

For visitors to Mueller’s site, riding the train displays a carousel documenting backlash to Friend, as well as “performance art” by visitors poking fun at the ads in less serious ways. One example showed a vandalized ad changing “Friend” to “Fries,” with a crude illustration of McDonald’s French fries, while another transformed the ad into a campaign for “fried chicken.”

Others were seemingly more serious about turning the ad into a warning. One vandal drew a bunch of arrows pointing to the “end” in Friend while turning the pendant into a cry-face emoji, seemingly drawing attention to research on the mental health risks of relying on AI companions—including the alleged suicide risks of products like Character.AI and ChatGPT, which have spawned lawsuits and prompted a Senate hearing.

Vandals deface ads for AI necklaces that listen to all your conversations Read More »

xai-workers-balked-over-training-request-to-help-“give-grok-a-face,”-docs-show

xAI workers balked over training request to help “give Grok a face,” docs show

For the more than 200 employees who did not opt out, xAI asked that they record 15- to 30-minute conversations, where one employee posed as the potential Grok user and the other posed as the “host.” xAI was specifically looking for “imperfect data,” BI noted, expecting that only training on crystal-clear videos would limit Grok’s ability to interpret a wider range of facial expressions.

xAI’s goal was to help Grok “recognize and analyze facial movements and expressions, such as how people talk, react to others’ conversations, and express themselves in various conditions,” an internal document said. Allegedly among the only guarantees to employees—who likely recognized how sensitive facial data is—was a promise “not to create a digital version of you.”

To get the most out of data submitted by “Skippy” participants, dubbed tutors, xAI recommended that they never provide one-word answers, always ask follow-up questions, and maintain eye contact throughout the conversations.

The company also apparently provided scripts to evoke facial expressions they wanted Grok to understand, suggesting conversation topics like “How do you secretly manipulate people to get your way?” or “Would you ever date someone with a kid or kids?”

For xAI employees who provided facial training data, privacy concerns may still exist, considering X—the social platform formerly known as Twitter that recently was folded into xAI—has recently been targeted by what Elon Musk called a “massive” cyberattack. Because of privacy risks ranging from identity theft to government surveillance, several states have passed strict biometric privacy laws to prevent companies from collecting such data without explicit consent.

xAI did not respond to Ars’ request for comment.

xAI workers balked over training request to help “give Grok a face,” docs show Read More »