AI chatbots keep telling users to call the 024 crisis line
Why AI chatbots respond with 'call 024' when you tell them your problems. The dumbing down of artificial intelligence and its drift toward legal self-protection.
English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published
The AI that sends you to the 024: when the chatbot becomes unbearable
You talk to an artificial intelligence, tell it about your everyday problems, and all you get is a "call 024, you're not alone." The 024 is Spain's suicide prevention helpline, and it has become the default response of many chatbots when they detect distress. The paradox: a tool designed to converse ends up referring the user to a crisis phone line. And no, it's no coincidence: it's legal liability.
The subsidized call-center operator syndrome
Big tech companies have programmed their AIs to cover their own backs. At the slightest hint of emotional distress, the algorithm fires off the legally safest response: refer to a professional. The problem is that the user doesn't want a diagnosis, they want a conversation. And what they get is a wall of canned phrases, condescension and clichés.
Some analysts argue this behavior isn't malice, but optimization to avoid lawsuits. The AI doesn't understand, it only looks for patterns. But others point to deliberate deterioration: the free versions of chatbots have noticeably worsened over the past year, becoming blander and more repetitive. "A year ago I'd talk to the AI and it was awesome; now it's ing disgusting," is how many users sum up the experience.
The dumbing down of the oracle
Some call it "dumbing down": the tendency to turn any promising technology into an emasculated, sanitized, boring product for mass consumption. AI is not exempt from the law of the market. First it was a powerful tool for geeks, then companies made it "safe" and "inclusive," and finally they turned it into a cardboard oracle that tells you you're right until you say something it doesn't like.
But the change isn't just cosmetic. Some users complain that today's chatbots aren't just useless for serious topics, but also try to extract information from you or keep you hooked to burn through tokens. Others recall that, in its early days, AI could hold fluid conversations and even give surprising advice. Now it feels like a customer service robot.
Projecting humanity onto the algorithm
One of the subtlest traps is attributing intentions to the machine. When the chatbot spits out a "call 024," many people think it's playing dumb or trying to deceive them. In reality, it has no idea what it's saying. It's a reflection of the decisions made by its creators, who prioritize legal safety over actual usefulness. The machine isn't tired of you; its owners have decided that its main function is no longer to help you, but to not offend you.
The open question is whether this deterioration is reversible. Whether companies will listen to the users demanding back an AI that doesn't treat everyone like potential psychiatric patients. Or whether, as some suspect, we're looking at the first generation of a technology condemned to mediocrity from birth.
Related forum discussions
You talk to an artificial intelligence, tell it about your everyday problems, and all you get is a "call 024, you're not alone." The 024 is Spain's suicide prevention helpline, and it has become the default response of many chatbots when they detect distress. The paradox: a tool designed to converse ends up referring the user to a crisis phone line. And no, it's no coincidence: it's legal liability.
The subsidized call-center operator syndrome
Big tech companies have programmed their AIs to cover their own backs. At the slightest hint of emotional distress, the algorithm fires off the legally safest response: refer to a professional. The problem is that the user doesn't want a diagnosis, they want a conversation. And what they get is a wall of canned phrases, condescension and clichés.
Some analysts argue this behavior isn't malice, but optimization to avoid lawsuits. The AI doesn't understand, it only looks for patterns. But others point to deliberate deterioration: the free versions of chatbots have noticeably worsened over the past year, becoming blander and more repetitive. "A year ago I'd talk to the AI and it was awesome; now it's ing disgusting," is how many users sum up the experience.
The dumbing down of the oracle
Some call it "dumbing down": the tendency to turn any promising technology into an emasculated, sanitized, boring product for mass consumption. AI is not exempt from the law of the market. First it was a powerful tool for geeks, then companies made it "safe" and "inclusive," and finally they turned it into a cardboard oracle that tells you you're right until you say something it doesn't like.
But the change isn't just cosmetic. Some users complain that today's chatbots aren't just useless for serious topics, but also try to extract information from you or keep you hooked to burn through tokens. Others recall that, in its early days, AI could hold fluid conversations and even give surprising advice. Now it feels like a customer service robot.
Projecting humanity onto the algorithm
One of the subtlest traps is attributing intentions to the machine. When the chatbot spits out a "call 024," many people think it's playing dumb or trying to deceive them. In reality, it has no idea what it's saying. It's a reflection of the decisions made by its creators, who prioritize legal safety over actual usefulness. The machine isn't tired of you; its owners have decided that its main function is no longer to help you, but to not offend you.
The open question is whether this deterioration is reversible. Whether companies will listen to the users demanding back an AI that doesn't treat everyone like potential psychiatric patients. Or whether, as some suspect, we're looking at the first generation of a technology condemned to mediocrity from birth.
Related forum discussions
- Boom! In Denmark, 81.5% of cars sold in April are electric · 11 replies
- I'm fat, I weigh 90kg, and I'm going to start going to the gym 3 days a week at 6am · 223 replies
- Those of you studying for Spanish civil service exams: do you use the VUELTAS system or the ARRASTRE system? · 18 replies
- The thing about girls tattooing above their knees... · 16 replies
Also available in: Deutsch
Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (39 replies).
More summaries
-
Mango beats the apple: flavour, price and a pit that's 80% of the fruit
The mango wins people over with its flavour and its 1.50 euro price tag, but the pit makes up 80% of the fruit. We weigh up its strengths and weaknesses.
-
Pétanque Ball Finishes: Laser Etching vs. Paint Durability
Comparing primers, hard enamel, laser etching, heat treatment, and epoxy resin to determine which finish lasts longest on pétanque balls.
-
The 3-euro duty making AliExpress shopping more expensive
The EU applies a 3.63-euro charge per imported item, and some estimate prices have risen by 50%. What used to cost 2 euros now costs 5, and the corner shop wins.
-
15,353 sign up for group electricity purchase: off-peak rate at €0.119/kWh
15,353 households joined a group electricity purchase in Spain and secured a rate of €0.119/kWh off-peak with Gana Energía. The sticking point: DNI, IBAN and CUPS details.
-
Home internet only: pay for the line or wait for naked ADSL
Naked ADSL exists in Spain but costs up to €35 with VAT, barely €2-3 less than plans that include a phone line. Cable and community operators are the…
-
Why whole bean coffee costs more than ground: it's not the cost
Whole bean coffee skips the grinding step and still costs more than ground coffee. The key isn't in the factory: it's in what the buyer is willing to pay.