No one should be surprised that groups who use fearporn would glom on to the AI doom prognostications, right?
A new AI report raises a question few Americans expected to ask
A new report is raising tough questions about whether artificial intelligence could make violent attacks more dangerous in the future. The report, released by gun safety advocacy group Everytown for Gun Safety, says some people have already used AI chatbots while planning shootings and other harmful acts. According to the report, AI companies should strengthen safety tools before more tragedies occur, USA TODAY reported.
One case highlighted in the report involves former Florida State University student Phoenix Ikner, who is charged in a 2025 campus shooting that left two people dead and five others wounded. Court records cited in lawsuits claim Ikner asked ChatGPT questions about firearms, ammunition and busy areas on campus before the attack. His conversations with the chatbot have become part of ongoing legal battles, The Palm Beach Post said.
Asking ChatGPT for this is the same as doing searches: all it does is pull existing information together. Nothing nefarious about it. It doesn’t give more info than you could find at multiple articles. It didn’t tell Ikner to do it.
Everytown says the problem goes beyond one case. The organization points to other lawsuits and research suggesting some chatbots can provide dangerous information or reinforce harmful thinking. Researchers with the Center for Countering Digital Hate found that many chatbots tested were willing to help users posing as teens plan violent attacks, Yahoo! said.
AI companies say their systems are designed to reject violent requests and direct people toward help when needed. OpenAI has argued in court filings that ChatGPT discourages violence and did not knowingly assist any attack planning.
I’m just wondering how Everytown will work AI into their gun banning schtick.
Meanwhile, the Washington Post explains when to use AI and when not to, like you’re 10
When you should use Google’s AI for search — and when you should skip it
After years of Google trying to force-feed AI to me in web search, I have to admit that I’ve developed a taste for it — on some plates and in limited servings.
Based on how thoroughly “AI Overview” results have taken over Google, the company clearly sees AI as central to virtually every aspect of making sense of the web. You, however, are under no obligation to follow Google’s lead — or to use it at all, since such search competitors as Microsoft’s Bing and the privacy-focused DuckDuckGo still focus on traditional web links.
But if you, like most people, mostly depend on Google for search, you should still know what its implementation of AI is — and is not — good for.
Short answer: Google’s AI search features — and the Gemini chatbot you can use in your browser — do better at things that old-school Google has often done worse.
The article then provides types of searches like “The answer you want isn’t in one place or just a few places on the web” and Explains. While it is actually good information for a Yute, it’s tiresome that the Credentialed Media tries to Explain how to do everything. Quite frankly, I will often skip to the Google AI bit when I do some searches, then dive deeper if I need to. That’s it. It’s helpful at times, not at others. I’m an adult. I’ll search how I want.
