[RowanH]

You realise this is fearmongering on AI right? It's literally trying to find anything that AI might be connected with as "bad" to paint AI in a negative light. I'm sure you can/are hiding behind "well readers can draw their own conclusions".

But in this day and age you just need 4 seconds to look at a page of headlines, numbers, and a conclusion will be drawn.

I'd hardly conclude that email as an "incident". There's incidents every day of people using technology and screwing up - we don't have a "Reply-AllIncidents.com"

I'm all for highlighting and examing real, scary, tangible problems with AI. But it feels like you've got the bar way too low here.

[smcgregor]

The line is not so clear as you are indicating. If I produce a system that makes 7 billion people feel slightly more depressed, then that system will in all probability contributed to a non-zero number of suicides. The unfortunate matter is that with fantastical scale there comes a need for systems that can understand the long tail of outcomes because there are real lives and impacts in the tails.