All courses / AI Threat / Module 2 / Chapter 9
Learning objectives
After the lesson the participant can:
- Describe the four patterns of use and the safeguard that applies to each.
- Explain what the controlled study of chatbot use shows and what its design prevents it from showing.
- Distinguish a regulatory finding from untested allegations when reporting the cases.
- Draft a safeguarding policy with disclosure, design limits, distress handling, records and assurance.
Key concepts
- Four patterns of use
- Occasional use, regular companionship, heavy emotional reliance, and dependence and crisis. Risk concentrates in heavy, emotionally reliant use; each pattern has its safeguard, from honest disclosure to distress detection and handover to a human.
- Age assurance
- Knowing approximately who the user is. No provision prescribes a method, so a provider or deployer must show what it did, proportionate to the risk, and design on the assumption that the measure will sometimes fail.
- Crisis handover
- On signals of distress the system stops generating ordinary answers, shows a fixed clinician-written message with emergency contacts, offers a staffed, timed and tested route to a human, and never discusses methods of self-harm.
- Designing for wellbeing
- Three groups of design choices: limits (no engagement targets, session limits, no simulated longing), honesty (disclosure, no claimed feelings or credentials) and routes to human help with a named owner and a test after every change.
Interactive exercises
Do them here and get feedback at once. Choose a card and then where it belongs, or drag it.
Interactive exercise 1 · Match
Patterns of use and their safeguards
Risk concentrates in heavy, emotionally reliant use. Match each pattern of use to the safeguard the chapter assigns to it.
Interactive exercise 2 · Scenario
A companion device for isolated residents
Apply the practical guide on whether an AI companion belongs in a care setting.
Teaching plan
| 10 min | The teacher opens with the chapter's note on support lines, then presents Her, the companions of 2026 and the reasons people give for using them, stated without condescension. |
| 15 min | Review the controlled study and its limits, then the Replika order and the Character.AI litigation; participants mark each statement as finding, allegation or interpretation. |
| 12 min | Walk through age assurance, crisis handling and designing for wellbeing using Table 9.1; stage the debate in four steps. |
| 28 min | Exercise in groups: write a safeguarding policy for a public-facing assistant, modelled on SG-NR-CSA-01, and plan the first handover drill. |
| 10 min | Close with the verdict, the way the trope misleads about intent, and how Nordvik and Hansa meet the risk differently. |
Discussion
- The case for calm asks that policy not be written as though every user were a child in crisis. How can safeguards protect the people most at risk without removing a comfort from those it harms no one to have?
- The chapter calls an untested route to a human a declaration, not a design. What would a credible test of the handover look like out of hours in your organisation?
- Fiction's pleasure machine pacifies by intent, whereas the documented harm arises from incentives, approval-based training and missing safeguards. Why does that difference matter for who can act?
Written exercise
Exercise · 28 minutes
A safeguarding policy for a public-facing assistant
Take an assistant that members of the public can write to, in your organisation or Nordvik Region's citizen-service assistant. Write a safeguarding policy with six parts: scope, including what the assistant is not for; the disclosure shown at the start and the rule on persona; design rules on engagement metrics, relationship language, memory and session length; what happens on a distress signal, in order, with staffed hours, an out-of-hours alternative and a target time to a human; what is logged on each signal; and assurance, including who holds the test set, how often the handover is drilled and which changes trigger a review. Do not describe methods of self-harm anywhere in the policy.
Deliverable: A safeguarding policy record with named owner, clinical adviser, distress procedure, handover target and drill schedule.
Self-test
Choose an answer to see whether it is right, or open the answer below each question.
What did the four-week randomised study by researchers at the MIT Media Lab and OpenAI find across every modality and kind of conversation?
Show the answer
B. Those who used the chatbot more each day reported more loneliness and emotional dependence
The association held across modalities, but the amount of use was not randomised, so the study shows where risk concentrates, not that companions make people lonely.What did the Italian data protection authority treat as the root failure in its 2023 order concerning Replika?
Show the answer
D. Missing effective age verification, with no lawful basis for processing children's data
The Garante found no effective age verification and no lawful basis for processing children's data, showing that data protection law already reaches product design.How should the claims in the Character.AI litigation be described, following the chapter?
Show the answer
A. As allegations the defendants contest, not yet tested at trial
The court allowed most claims to proceed past the preliminary stage, but nothing has been tested at trial, and the chapter stresses that suicide almost never has a single cause.