this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2026
716 points (99.3% liked)

Technology

88698 readers
2970 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

What just happened? Another incident has taken place that illustrates the need to be careful what you tell AI. A Florida woman is facing felony charges after she used Claude as a diary and allegedly wrote that she planned to "shoot up" the Sheriff's office. After a human reviewer examined the statements, they were reported to police.

According to the arrest report, Carli Michelle Heller, of Bonita Springs, Florida, wrote on September 26 that she would attack the Sheriff's office. She later said that she uses Anthropic's chatbot like a "diary."

Claude's safety systems flagged the entry and it was escalated to a human reviewer. After deciding it was a credible threat, the reviewer reported it to law enforcement.

The company says it may share user information in limited emergencies if it believes disclosure is necessary to prevent death or serious physical injury.

Deputies identified Heller and visited her home. She was detained without incident before an LCSO intelligence detective took over the investigation.

Heller faces a charge of making a written threat of violence under Florida law. Florida Statute 836.10 makes it a second-degree felony to send, post, or transmit a written or electronic record threatening to kill or injure someone, carry out a mass shooting, or commit an act of terrorism. The communication must be made in a manner in which another person may view it.

Anthropic isn't going to be taking any chances when it comes to anything it deems a potential threat. Last month, it was reported that OpenAI and Sam Altman are being sued by British Columbia over claims that the company could have prevented a mass shooting in the Canadian province.

The shooter, eighteen-year-old former pupil Jesse Van ⁠Rootselaar, had previously been flagged by OpenAI's safety team for her conversations about gun violence, but OpenAI never alerted police because the conversations did not meet the threshold for legal referral.

In June, Florida also sued OpenAI and Altman, alleging that ChatGPT had contributed to real-world harms, including the 2025 Florida State University shooting.

The latest incident is another reminder to think before you enter something into a chatbot that could get you into trouble. It's certainly not a private diary whose contents are for your eyes only.

Reports last month revealed that human contractors reviewing Microsoft Copilot's image editor can see users' prompts, uploaded photos and AI-generated edits. Documents show that some of those assignments contain sexual, disturbing or potentially illegal material, though the reviewers are not there to flag the content – only to assess whether the output is accurate.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Mihies@programming.dev 229 points 5 days ago (2 children)

And people were not-so-long-ago concerned that phones are spying after them. Now they just send all the info themselves.

[–] Soulphite@reddthat.com 211 points 5 days ago (9 children)
[–] lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world 53 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Up until the 80s, there was still some debate over whether wiretaps should be legal. It's sad that we have come to accept them as normal.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 36 points 5 days ago (1 children)

It was less worrisome back then. The cost to have someone listen to and transcribe your conversations was quite high. They'd really have to want to go after someone to do it.

Now, turning voice conversations into searchable text is nearly free.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 5 days ago (4 children)

Not only that - wiretaps have Judicial Oversight in that they require a Court Order (well, in most of the World, not sure if that's the case in present day America) which a Judge supposedly only issues if there's reason to suspect the person whose lines are tapped of committing or preparing to commit a crime, whilst Antrophic's surveillance of people's conversations with their chatbot has no Judicial Oversight at all and has no minimum legal threshold that must be reached before it is allowed to happen.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Willy@sh.itjust.works 24 points 5 days ago (13 children)

i know very few people who wereor are concerned about being spied on regardless of how much they should be.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] Professorozone@lemmy.world 44 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I find it interesting that, if their AI gets out of control, there's nothing they can do about it, but if a USER of that AI gets out of control, there is something they can do about it..

[–] blackshirt@lemmy.world 16 points 5 days ago

Also depends on how mega rich that USER is.

[–] rbb36@lemmy.world 100 points 5 days ago (7 children)

"The company says it may share user information in limited emergencies if it believes disclosure is necessary to prevent death or serious physical injury."

Also keep in mind: Your chat logs are company assets. Even if today's decision makers believe maintaining user trust is net profitable, that will not always be true. Some day, maybe when the pullback comes and the wolves are at the gates, or when they sell the company, or when a shareholder action asserts fiduciary duty to maximize shareholder value, your chat logs will be sold and mined in the most lucrative way possible. The way that extracts the most value from you, the product.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] crbn@lemmy.world 34 points 5 days ago (4 children)

Why would you even use Claude as a fuckin diary?

[–] Simulation6@sopuli.xyz 14 points 4 days ago

First 2 words of the title answer that question.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] percent@infosec.pub 63 points 5 days ago (8 children)

It's always interesting to see how much people trust sending such personal information to some service on the Internet, expecting privacy.

I'm not sure I'd even want my own self-hosted LLMs to have something like a personal diary. Sending all that to an AI company would never even cross my mind.

I understand that most people aren't the tech-oriented types who get into self-hosting and running their own LLMs, but people have had diaries for centuries before LLMs existed.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 21 points 4 days ago (5 children)

Kinda unrelated. But what happens when OpenAI or Anthropic's loans come due and they have no legal way to turn a profit, but are sitting on a treasure trove of corporate secrets?

[–] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 7 points 4 days ago

And bank account numbers

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] x00z@lemmy.world 79 points 5 days ago (2 children)

The communication must be made in a manner in which another person may view it.

So she shouldn't even get charged.

[–] atrielienz@lemmy.world 41 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Yeah, I'd wager that is what the case will hinge on. She wasn't aware anyone could view it. Otherwise it's incredibly unlikely that she would have made such a statement to Claude at all.

On the other hand though, I'm sure Claude's parent company and the prosecution will argue that she didn't have an expectation of privacy where this statement is concerned (given TOS/EULA, in combination with the number of news articles/reports on the subject).

[–] Willy@sh.itjust.works 31 points 5 days ago

i think anthopic was right to report it, but the cops likely overstepped. if she had “threatened” the president she would have been assesed by ss but likely not arrested. i wonder if the same cops she was “threatening” were the ones she was reported to and arrested by.

[–] lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world 18 points 5 days ago (1 children)

This is just ass coverage for the company. They're not going to pursue it. They just didn't want to get sued for not reporting it if she did commit a mass shooting. The prosecution though might.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] iuseasahibtw@ani.social 27 points 5 days ago (13 children)

Self host if you're gonna use AI, in fact, self host whenever possible. There are numerous examples of companies using centralized data to sell, report to police, or even having it fall into the hands of hackers.

I really think people think that all data input to a website is actually stored locally, nope, don't be dumb.

[–] IamMoonPie@lemmy.world 10 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Better yet… just don’t us AI

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 46 points 5 days ago

After a human reviewer examined the statements, they were reported to police.

The guardrails are working as intended. ONLY persecute the public with them. Government skynet, and bond villains will have access to non guardrailed models, or any "flagged for review" markers will be ignored to bomb more elementary schools. A sheriff's office is government power related. School shootings is just a thoughts and prayers issue, if you're confused about the line between this and other incidents/attitudes we are being spied on for.

[–] Mulligrubs@lemmy.world 28 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Florida Statute 836.10 makes it a second-degree felony to send, post, or transmit a written or electronic record threatening to kill or injure someone

This means a significant portion of Lemmy (and the rest of the internet) are criminals evading justice

great law top shelf

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] unitedwithme@lemmy.today 6 points 4 days ago

Florida Statute 836.10 makes it a second-degree felony to send, post, or transmit a written or electronic record threatening to kill or injure someone, carry out a mass shooting, or commit an act of terrorism.

She wrote out in a means she thought was private. If using a paperback diary, no one would be the wiser and her not acting on it would never be noticed.

Anyway, if she gets a good lawyer, show me where she "sent, posted or transmitted" said electronic record! It's really no different than emailing that to yourself because you think you'll be the only person to see it. (Never mind companies scan your email and cloud too)

[–] Klostein@reddthat.com 13 points 4 days ago (7 children)

Americans doing anything but proper gun control

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Willy@sh.itjust.works 39 points 5 days ago (7 children)

doesnt seem like the right charge. not sure she should be charged with anything though. seems like she should get some help and make sure she isnt gonna shoot nothing up and maybe get some learning on how computer shit works, but if this doesnt make her curious then nothing probably will.

a bigger issue is that many if not most devices are headed to having everything ai integrated so even if she diaried in a notepad file it would get scanned and reported.

[–] Armand1@lemmy.world 30 points 5 days ago

Yeah, I know someone frustrated with their local council who privately says "I'm going to 💥 the council" as a joke. That's very different to sending a threatening letter to the council itself. Or harassing them.

The example here feels closer to the former than the latter.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] the_riviera_kid@lemmy.world 9 points 4 days ago

AI and idiots go together like peanut butter and jelly.

[–] athatet@lemmy.zip 22 points 5 days ago

Hell yeah. Thought crime. Time to get Tom Cruise in here to Minority Report all of us.

[–] Greyghoster@aussie.zone 17 points 5 days ago (6 children)

While a chatbot has been demonstrated not to be a private diary, it will be interesting to see if the courts agree that she intentionally use her diary to communicate or thought that someone else would read it. Like most users of dear diary she probably thought her secrets were safe and her diary would never tell.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] OryxAndCake@slrpnk.net 5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Telling the wire tap all your secrets, and expecting it to honor them?! is fucking next level delusional.

[–] HeartyOfGlass@piefed.social 28 points 5 days ago (9 children)

after a human reviewer examined the statements

What, do they not trust their own AI? The AI they're screaming keeps "breaking containment"?

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] NutWrench@lemmy.ml 6 points 4 days ago

Don't use "AI" for anything you wouldn't mind seeing plastered all over the Internet. You wouldn't tell a human being that you were planning to "shoot up a sheriff's office" would you? Why would an AI keep that a secret?

[–] rounding_error@lemmy.today 12 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (6 children)

The communication must be made in a manner in which another person may view it.

So, their entire argument hinges on someone from Anthropic manually reviewing EVERY ""private"" message someone sends to Claude? Them false charges.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 15 points 5 days ago (1 children)

How FUCKING hard is it to use like, notepad?

[–] redballooon@lemmy.world 12 points 5 days ago (2 children)

Notepad doesn't answer and doesn't agree as eagerly.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] tigermountain@lemmy.world 7 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Who would use AI to write down dairy entries? Was she looking for feedback?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 12 points 5 days ago (1 children)

They need to put one of those "I understand" checkbox disclaimers when you start a session. "I understand that what I enter here could be subject to human review and reporting to law enforcement."

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Yerbouti@sh.itjust.works 16 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Dear Claude, I'm aware of a dangerous pedophile's location, can you report him to the police?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] PangurBan@lemmy.world 11 points 5 days ago (7 children)

ZDR policies really are a must. If a service doesn't have it, don't use it.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Zomg@piefed.world 17 points 5 days ago (6 children)

AI or not, I hope anyone recognizes "I want to shoot up X" as a problem and seeks to identify and resolve whatever conflict their having to not feel this way.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 10 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Sounds like a gray area. She didn't write it with the intention of it being transmitted to anyone. It wouldn't be any different than writing it in a private diary. The BC lawsuit though puts them in an obvious bind so the law needs to choose a side, is it a private forum or not?

load more comments
view more: next ›