Google Plans To Roll Out Its AI Chatbot To Children Under 13 (theverge.com) 19
An anonymous reader quotes a report from the New York Times: Google plans to roll out its Gemini artificial intelligence chatbot next week for children under 13 (source paywalled; alternative source) who have parent-managed Google accounts, as tech companies vie to attract young users with A.I. products. "Gemini Apps will soon be available for your child," the company said in an email this week to the parent of an 8-year-old. "That means your child will be able to use Gemini" to ask questions, get homework help and make up stories. The chatbot will be available to children whose parents useFamily Link, a Google service that enables families to set up Gmail and opt into services like YouTube for their child. To sign up for a child account, parents provide the tech company with personal data like their child's name and birth date. Gemini has specific guardrails for younger users to hinder the chatbot from producing certain unsafe content, said Karl Ryan, a Google spokesman. When a child with a Family Link account uses Gemini, he added, the company will not use that data to train its A.I.
Introducing Gemini for children could accelerate the use of chatbots among a vulnerable population as schools, colleges, companies and others grapple with the effects of popular generative A.I. technologies. Trained on huge amounts of data, these systems can produce humanlike text and realistic-looking images and videos. [...] Google acknowledged some risks in its email to families this week, alerting parents that "Gemini can make mistakes" and suggesting they "help your child think critically" about the chatbot. The email also recommended parents teach their child how to fact-check Gemini's answers. And the company suggested parents remind their child that "Gemini isn't human" and "not to enter sensitive or personal info in Gemini." Despite the company's efforts to filter inappropriate material, the email added, children "may encounter content you don't want them to see."
Introducing Gemini for children could accelerate the use of chatbots among a vulnerable population as schools, colleges, companies and others grapple with the effects of popular generative A.I. technologies. Trained on huge amounts of data, these systems can produce humanlike text and realistic-looking images and videos. [...] Google acknowledged some risks in its email to families this week, alerting parents that "Gemini can make mistakes" and suggesting they "help your child think critically" about the chatbot. The email also recommended parents teach their child how to fact-check Gemini's answers. And the company suggested parents remind their child that "Gemini isn't human" and "not to enter sensitive or personal info in Gemini." Despite the company's efforts to filter inappropriate material, the email added, children "may encounter content you don't want them to see."
This will go well (Score:1)
Or not. One of the two.
I'm 12 and what is this? (Score:2)
Show me a picture of a kitty
Johnny Long #5 (Score:3)
Google is releasing a product intended for children?
Given history, I’m looking forward to Johnny Long #5 at DEFCON showing us how this product isn’t for children anymore.
Chatbot to be pulled fifteen minutes later (Score:2)
...when Johnny's nature report about beavers takes a sudden turn...
No calculator in early age (Score:5, Insightful)
We don't let children use calculators until certain age, after they have learnt all the basic math.
AI chatbots should be regarded similarly, with a higher restriction until a lot later than calculators.
Re: (Score:2)
We don't, but perhaps we should? It might make them better at problem solving and math in general.
https://mathsnoproblem.com/blo... [mathsnoproblem.com]
Will they be worse at calculating on paper? Absolutely. But does that matter?
Re: (Score:2)
Having the ability to do basic mental arithmetic is a valuable skill we use every day. Being able to make reasonable estimates can save you from making potentially expensive mistakes.
What's 23.71 x 42,372? No idea, but having a feel for numbers and mental calculations allows me to work out straight away that the answer is going to be somewhere near 1,000,000. If I then input the numbers into a calculator and get an answer closer to 100,000 or 10,000,000, I know from my estimate that I've messed something up
Re: (Score:2)
If we restrict access to AI until children are educated enough to think for themselves, most people will die of old age never having used AI.
Re: No calculator in early age (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And our current state of schooling doesn't even qualify to enter the conversation... too busy being a daycare center.
Re: (Score:2)
normalize (Score:2)
i'm scared this will make it so kids will be normalized into talking with strangers online.
well aren't they just following the religious (Score:3)
I read the article you linked to. (Score:2)
Well... most of it. Color me skeptical. Each time somebody tries to do an end run around forming that basic bedrock of skills we end up with worse outcomes. Now that's strictly my take on the state of education. I can't back it up with hard data. But it seems to me that calculators would do as much for children's math skills as texting and autocomplete have improved children's literacy.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah crap. Bad nesting. Curse you, small form factor and degrading vision!
Not that big a deal (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
...unless you care about your children or the future of humanity.
The new electronic babysitter is slightly more nefarious and insidious than the old electronic babysitter. Indoctrinate them young and think of the possibilities!
An electronic profile of every question asked from the youngest possible age. I'm certain this won't be built in such a way that "Potential Problem Trajectories" will be reported to the authorities before any actual activity that could be deemed a crime occurs.
Advertising potential from the moment a child can use a computing device. My god, the ad
Re: (Score:2)
You know that people were always property until