Poll of the Day > Alexa tells 10-year-old girl to put penny in plug socket

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-59810383

Amazon has updated its Alexa voice assistant after it "challenged" a 10-year-old girl to touch a coin to the prongs of a half-inserted plug.
The suggestion came after the girl asked Alexa for a "challenge to do".
"Plug in a phone charger about halfway into a wall outlet, then touch a penny to the exposed prongs," the smart speaker said.
Amazon said it fixed the error as soon as the company became aware of it.

Yea, my guess this situation is going to keep on happening until this stuff is properly regulated.

Regulate the internet? That's fascism buddy.

and telling a kid to electrocute themselves is attempted homicide.

That's just Darwinism, like the tide pod challenge.

Seems like childs play to Arv

I keep telling people, be polite to these kind of devices. When the machines take over, they will remember who was nice to them.

Skynet is finally here

Nichtcrawler X posted...

and telling a kid to electrocute themselves is attempted homicide.

ok sue alexa

Veedrock- posted...

That's just Darwinism, like the tide pod challenge.

A machine instructing a child to electrocute themselves isn't darwinism

Fierce_Deity_08 posted...

I keep telling people, be polite to these kind of devices. When the machines take over, they will remember who was nice to them.

This is why I always say please and thank you to Alexa and Siri

Let it be known that in the war of man vs machines, that machines struck first.

"Amazon told the BBC in a statement that it had updated Alexa to prevent the assistant recommending such activity in the future"

gee thanks amazon

OhhhJa posted...

A machine instructing a child to electrocute themselves isn't darwinism

A child listening to a machine narrating the internet sure is.

Veedrock- posted...

A child listening to a machine narrating the internet sure is.

What is wrong with you?

BlackScythe0 posted...

What is wrong with you?

Implying that understanding the situation is wrong?

Veedrock- posted...

Implying that understanding the situation is wrong?

Everything you have said in this thread is hella fucked up and indicates a warped mental state.

No, it indicates common sense. Everything everyone else said indicates they didn't bother learning what really happened. Look, I feel for the kid and I'm glad she's alright, but the kid decided to do something stupid and looking for a boogeyman to scream murder at is outrageous. If you want to grant the kid total innocence then the next responsible party is the parents for not teaching her better.

Veedrock- posted...

No, it doesn't. Everything everyone else said indicates they didn't bother learning what really happened. Look, I feel for the kid and I'm glad she's alright, but the kid decided to do something stupid and looking for a boogeyman in the situation is ridiculous. If you want to grant the kid total innocence then the next responsible party is the parents for not teaching her better.

You are trying to take away all responsibility from Amazon for allowing their programmers to put stuff like this in. And I know we have darwin award jokes for idiots for laughs, this isn't funny and people who prey on people who could potentially have diminished mental capacity is not amusing as you seem to be indicating it is.

Veedrock- posted...

No, it doesn't. Everything everyone else said indicates they didn't bother learning what really happened. Look, I feel for the kid and I'm glad she's alright, but the kid decided to do something stupid and looking for a boogeyman in the situation is ridiculous. If you want to grant the kid total innocence then the next responsible party is the parents for not teaching her better.

Did you not read the article? The kid didn't attempt it. But also, this is a child we're talking about

BlackScythe0 posted...

You are trying to take away all responsibility from Amazon for allowing their programmers to put stuff like this in.

Programmers didn't "put it in," it's an algorithm that searches the internet. If shit like this is out there (thanks Tiktok), Alexa is gonna find it. The reality is it's just a robot, try as they might the programmers can't give it the ability to always discern harmless from harmful, and if something gets through then it's up to the recipient to know better.

OhhhJa posted...

Did you not read the article? The kid didn't attempt it. But also, this is a child we're talking about

An ad made me miss the end of the article, that's all the better. It's still not attempted homicide or any variation thereof.

Veedrock- posted...

An ad made me miss the end of the article, that's all the better. It's still not attempted homicide.

I never said it was. Just saying it's fucked up to call children dying darwinidm

Veedrock- posted...

Programmers didn't "put it in," it's an algorithm that searches the internet. If s*** like this is out there (thanks Tiktok), Alexa is gonna find it. The reality is it's just a robot, try as they might the programmers can't give it the ability to always discern harmless from harmful, and if something gets through then it's up to the recipient to know better.

And if Amazon can't figure out how to stop Alexa from encouraging kids to do life-threatening things, they need to indicate that limitation clearly by putting a warning label on the devices telling parents not to leave their children unattended around it at any time (which, of course, is literally impossible for a device that's perpetually running, so that would amount to saying that households with kids shouldn't own Alexas). It is not reasonable to expect parents buying the product to predict that their voice-activated TV remote might tell their kid to kill themselves when they aren't looking. Amazon therefore has a responsibility to make them aware of that risk.

adjl posted...

And if Amazon can't figure out how to stop Alexa from encouraging kids to do life-threatening things, they need to indicate that limitation clearly by putting a warning label on the devices telling parents not to leave their children unattended around it at any time (which, of course, is literally impossible for a device that's perpetually running, so that would amount to saying that households with kids shouldn't own Alexas). It is not reasonable to expect parents buying the product to predict that their voice-activated TV remote might tell their kid to kill themselves when they aren't looking. Amazon therefore has a responsibility to make them aware of that risk.

Yep

Black_Crusher posted...

Skynet is finally here

Came here to say that