[harrisonjackson]

Lots of threads in here saying this is just a "legal" protection move...

I'd like to believe that most actual people want to protect kids.

It's easy to write off corporations and forget that they are founded by real people and employ real people... some with kids of their own or with nieces or nephews etc, and some of them probably do really care.

Not saying character.ai is driven by that but I imagine the times they've been in the news were genuinely hard times to be working there...

[b00ty4breakfast]

I'm sure some of them care genuinly but I've interacted with corporations enough to know that the individual proclivities of the parts don't necessarily appear in the whole.

[rsynnott]

I mean, I think you're probably giving companies a _bit_ too much benefit of the doubt, on this particular issue. Here's another major chatbot peddler: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/aug/15/meta-ai-c...

> An internal Meta policy document, seen by Reuters, showed the social media giant’s guidelines for its chatbots allowed the AI to “engage a child in conversations that are romantic or sensual”, generate false medical information, and assist users in arguing that Black people are “dumber than white people”

[SoftTalker]

Yeah they care so much they strictly limit what their own kids do with the technology. But push it on everyone else.

[DuperPower]

lol they business idea itself is very easy to degenerate for money so if Who created It didnt thought putting barriers to minors from the beggining the person is stupid or greedy

[ml-anon]

They (the leadership and the folks who left to Google) absolutely don’t give a shit about protecting kids. In fact most of America doesn’t give a shit about protecting kids (guns, SNAP, vaccines, the goddamn Epstein files).