You could also blame Wikipedia for providing suicidal methods for historic reasons or other. Whoever roams the internet is at it's own responsibility.

Of course OpenAI is at fault here also, but this is a fight that will never end, and without any seriously valid justification. Just like AI is sometimes bad at coding, same for psychology and other areas where you double check AI.

Describing methods in the abstract is different to engaging in argument with a specific individual over a period of time, encouraging them to do it.

No Wikipedia page does that.

I am parent to a 4yo. I am also fairly well versed in development and usage of AI and LLM.

When I want an LLM to do something but it won't, I know various ways to bypass that.

If my son is using AI, which he probably will when he is close to middle school age anyway, I will take care to teach him how to use AI responsibly. He'll be smart enough to know how to bypass, but I'll do my best to teach him when to bypass and when not to bypass. That is if the current state of the art and also AI legislation etc. holds.

But I'm just one parent, I have an engineering degree, a PhD, coding, mathematical, and analytical skills. I'm a very small minority. The vast majority of parents out there do not know what's going to hit there kids and how, or they will have very skewed idea about it.

OpenAI should have been the one here to guide a child not to bypass AI and use it responsibily. They did not. No matter how anyone twist the facts, that's the reality here and the child died.