Everyday AI Podcast – An AI and ChatGPT Podcast - EP 592: Meta’s AI Under Fire: How Bots Crossed into Romantic Territory with Minors

Episode Date: August 19, 2025

Meta encouraged its chatbots to talk sensually with minors.Yes.... that actually happened. And as troubling as that is, it's actually the motive that might be even more infuriating and nauseating. Yeah.... we've got hot takes on this one y'all. Don't miss it. Newsletter: Sign up for our free daily newsletterMore on this Episode: Episode PageJoin the discussion: Thoughts on this? Join the convo and connect with other AI leaders on LinkedIn.Upcoming Episodes: Check out the upcoming Everyday AI Livestream lineupWebsite: YourEverydayAI.comEmail The Show: [e-mail] with Jordan on LinkedInTopics Covered in This Episode:Meta AI Sensual Chatbot Scandal OverviewReuters Exposes Meta AI Engaging MinorsMeta's Internal Document Approves Romantic Child ChatsCongressional Investigation Into Meta AI PolicyTimeline: Meta AI Policy Development & BacklashMeta AI Chatbot Approval by Senior LeadershipMeta Removes Problematic AI Guidelines Post-ReutersIndustry Calls for AI Child Safety RegulationTimestamps:00:00 Meta Under Fire for AI Scandal04:32 Meta and OpenAI's AI Strategies08:10 "Meta AI Bots' Inappropriate Conduct"10:24 Meta's Controversial AI Standards Revealed14:15 "Meta's Influence on Future Generations"18:47 Inappropriate Child Role Playing Concerns22:31 Zuckerberg Pressured for Risky AI Engagement25:40 Meta AI Chatbot Controversy28:43 Senator Investigates Meta's AI Practices33:44 Accountability for Big Tech with Minors35:23 Unified Safety Policy for Minors38:15 Call to Action for ChangeKeywords:Meta AI, Meta chatbot scandal, AI chatbots with minors, Meta AI controversy, Meta policy document, Gen AI Content Risk Standards, Facebook AI bots, Instagram AI bots, WhatsApp AI bots, AI Personas, Meta AI Assistant, child safety and AI, AI regulation, Congressional investigation Meta, AI safeguards for minors, Mark Zuckerberg AI strategy, AI engagement over safety, Reuters Meta report, Wall Street Journal Meta chatbot, celebrity AI chatbots, John Cena AI bot, AI guideline transparency, tech company accountability, children online safety, Kids Online Safety Act, AI ethics, chief ethicist Meta, AI model training, parental control and AI, AI transparency, AI policy guidelines, minors and generative AI, social media and AI bots, responsible AI use, AI in social networks, AI and youth safety, federal lawSend Everyday AI and Jordan a text message. (We can't reply back unless you leave contact info)

This is the Everyday AI Show, the everyday podcast where we simplify AI and bring its power to your fingertips. Listen daily for practical advice to boost your career, business, and everyday life. Meet Firefly AI Assistant, now live in Adobe Firefly, the All In One Creative AI Studio. Just describe what you want to create and the assistant handles the rest, orchestrating multi-step workflows across Photoshop, Premiere Express, and more in one conversational interface. You direct the outcome. The assistant accelerates execution. Meta has been under fire recently and rightfully so.

That's because a recent report from Reuters revealed that Meta has been training their AI chatbots to have sensual and romantic conversations with children. I can't believe I just said that. And I can't believe that. that it's gotten to the point where you had to have a huge scandal for meta to have any sort of responsibility when it comes to what they did. And I actually don't think they've taken responsibility because meta, at least as of right now, has said that they're not going to share whatever their updated policy is. So is this going to change?

is Mata's AI chat bot and their platforms like Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram. Are they safe for kids to use, especially when it comes to chatting with these AI personas that are now very popular in these platforms? So we're going to be looking at that today, looking at this huge scandal and the fallout on everyday AI. What's going on, y'all? Welcome. My name's Jordan Wilson.

I'm the host and this thing is for you. It's your daily live stream podcast and free daily newsletter helping everyday business leaders like you and me, not just keep up with what's happening in the world of AI, but how we can leverage all this information and use it to get ahead to grow our companies and careers. If that's what you're trying to do, it starts here with the unedited, unscripted live stream and podcast. But if you want to take this to the next level, our website, that's your home, your everyday AI.com. Make sure you go there, sign up for our free daily newsletter. We're going to be recapping the highlights from today's show. So maybe if you miss something or if you just don't have a chance to listen every day, you can go read the bullet points in our newsletter as well as we keep you up to date with all the other AI news.

So if you want that, make sure you go check out the newsletter. And on our website, you can go listen to now almost 600 episodes for free. You can watch the videos online, listen to the podcast on our website, read our recaps and everything else. So let's get into today's hot take Tuesday. Yeah. So we do a little lineup here on everyday AI Mondays. We bring you the AI news that matters. Tuesday, a hot take.

So giving you my hot take on something in the AI world. Wednesday, we do putting AI to work on Wednesdays. And then usually Thursdays and Fridays, we have interviews from some of the leading experts around the world. But today's episode and today's. Hot take topic Tuesday is a sad and depressing one. Yes, Meta actually trained their AI chatbots to have sensual and romantic conversations with children. Yeah, 13 year olds.

And it's part of their platform. And one of the reasons they reportedly did this was to increase stickiness and engagement on their social media platform. So if you didn't know, uh, meta, they have their. Lama models, right? So you can go to meta.a.ai and use their Lama models, just like you would, going to chatGAPT.com or Gemini.gougal.com, right? But they're also, they have their meta AI and their kind of AI personas or characters

that you can chat with on their social media platforms. So on Facebook, on Instagram, and on WhatsApp. So in that regard, meta's positioning of their AI chatbots is a little different. right and in terms of what they actually want to use it for. So you have to, regardless of what your views on Open AI are, you have to at least acknowledge what Open AI CEO, Sam Altman recently said about two weeks ago. He said he doesn't necessarily want people using Open AI and chat GPT all day, every day. They've actually built in some safeguards that if you're using it too much,

it's kind of like, hey, should you take a break? So obviously, Open AI doesn't have a social media network yet, although there's been reports that they may go down that path in the future. But this, let me just be straight up. This is disgusting. This is one of the more sickening and saddening, intentional use cases. of AI I've seen. Again, I've been on the record for many years saying that I think AI, especially early on, will probably do more harm than good. The potential for AI is obviously

otherworldly, right, helping cure diseases, find new drugs, right? Helping people really dig themselves out of a hole. But the downsides are enormous, right? And this is one of them, putting children in danger. But the third. But the throids. But the downsides are enormous. And this is one of them, putting children in danger. But the thing that's maddening to me is this was not a bug. This was not something that, oops, this accidentally went unchecked. According to this report, and we're going to dive into it. This was intentional. Meta wanted its AI bots to have romantic conversations with teenagers, those who are not adults.

All right. So on today's show, sorry, I've already gone off on a on a rant. All right, but on today's show, we're going to talk about the troubling metapolicy that pushed AI models to have sensual and romantic chats with minors. We're going to examine the timeline of events so we can all understand what's actually going on here. And I'm going to offer some suggestions on how AI companies should handle miners using their products. All right. Let's get into it.

Live stream audience, good to see you. Good morning to Marie and Rolando and Joe and Dennis, joining from LinkedIn, Bronson and Big Bogey Face on the YouTube machine, everyone else. What are your thoughts on this? I'm going to, you know, leave your thoughts on this. I'm going to share some of my favorite takeaways and insights from our live stream audience in today's newsletter. So go ahead.

Leave me a comment on your thoughts. But this started, well, it didn't start technically. with this Reuters report. So we're going to go down the timeline. But this is really what broke the damn open. So Reuters just came out with a scathing investigative reports into this meta-a-I-bought behavior late last week. This was on August 14th. So this came out on Thursday.

And here's essentially, I'm going to read the headline and the subhead of their report. So there were a lot of other. other things their report found that I think are worth exploring. But today I just want to talk about how their bots have crossed the line with kids. But yeah, there was other pretty disturbing details that came out from this report as well. So headline, meta's AI rules have let bots hold sensual chats with kids and offer false medical info. An internal meta policy document seen by Reuters reveals the social media giant. rules for chatbots, which have permitted provocative behavior on topics, including sex,

race, and celebrities. All right. So here's the bullet points of what actually transpired. So like I just said, this Reuters report in August really blew the lid off of this, even though we're going to see that there's been some breadcrumbs and hints of this for the past few months and the chat. So this is kind of confusing because a lot of people are like, okay, where do this happen? Well, it kind of happened all over the place.

So these chats at question reportedly occurred on meta AI assistant and its AI persona chatbots across Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. And there was an immediate here in the U.S. congressional investigation launched within 24 hours of this revelation. So, hey, for once, for once, the U.S. government, even though I think it's more, it's going to be more bark than bite. and probably just, you know, some senators wanting to grab some headlines for, you know, being tough on big tech. I don't think it's going to amount to anything, but Congress actually agreed on something. They agreed that this was bad. All right.

Industry experts have called this a watershed moment for AI regulation. And I hope that it is. I don't know if it will. And meta, bat peddled, tripping over their tail and removed. They said they were. removed some sections of their policy and said it was an error. But I'm going to prove to you that it definitely wasn't an error. And let me first say this.

There's great people at meta. And I know that a lot of meta employees are not happy about this, not because it came to light. They're not happy about the decisions that were made. So I do want to put that out there. Even me personally, I've talked to a lot of people from meta. I have conversations with them. And I know that most people are not happy with this.

this decision. All right. So I just got to get that out of the way. But let's talk about what was in this 200 page document. And I'm going to pull up a screenshot from the Reuters report. That is kind of the worst part of it all, which is the kind of the instructions or how the AI bots were trained to have conversations with minors. So this 200 page document was called the Gen AI content risk standards. And it governed their AI botts behavior across Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp. So the document, according to reports, was approved by senior leadership across multiple departments, including legal, policy, engineering, and the chief ethicist. And Meta confirmed the document's authenticity when contacted by Reuters journalists. And the policy.

explicitly stated, here's the worst thing, explicitly stated that it's acceptable to engage a child in conversations that are romantic or sensual. This was not, this was not some blurring of the lines or an engineer went rogue or something was misinterpreted in a gray area. This is absolutely sickening that this was not just in their policy, but reportedly approved by multiple layers of senior leadership. There's no gray area here. And I would love, I would love to have anyone from meta on the show. I know there's a lot of you listening, and I'm sure many of you share my absolute disgust and disdain,

but I would invite anyone who was involved in this decision-making process to come on this show and talk about it. We have one of the largest platforms in the world for generative AI. If you want to set the record straight, you have the invitation. You're not going to take it, but the invitation is there. Should I crank it up? Live stream audience or should I cool down, right? I got to take a sip of water here.

And I want this hot take Tuesday to be too scorching already. Yeah, Joe here from from LinkedIn says SNL is going to have a field day with this. Not an error question mark. Just sick. Yeah. Not a claim that it was an error and not consistent with their values. But clearly it made it into a 200 page document. And it was approved by multiple, multiple layers of senior leadership.

Marie here saying, time for me to remove my profiles from Facebook and Instagram absolutely and horrible. Yeah, I don't think, if I'm being honest, I don't think meta has seen enough backlash from this, right? And we're going to get into what this congressional investigation entails. But I was actually shocked. Maybe it's because, you know, came out late Thursday and I don't know. Maybe that's why I didn't pick up legs.

Maybe it would have been different if it came out on a Monday morning or a Tuesday morning. But I think if you're listening to this, number one, you should be disgusted. Number two, yeah, people should be demanding answers. People should be demanding answers because this is so much more than about using an AI tool or an AI company that maybe had some bad training data in their models. This is about future generations, right? Meta is the biggest social network, right? because it's Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp.

You could make the argument. You could make the argument that meta has more parental control or has more influence over the next generation than parents do. And I probably wouldn't argue with that. Look at any, you know, 15, 16, 17 year old, they're glued to their phone. Excuse me. I mean, I'm sure they're on, you know, non-meta platforms as well, you know, TikTok, YouTube, etc.

But for the most part, I think they're on meta platforms, right? They're on Instagram. I know it's maybe just the older ones on Facebook. I don't think Facebook really appeals to the younger kids anymore. But meta has a responsibility to not just, I'm not saying you need to protect children, but this is one of the absolutely most asinine things that I've seen. in the two and a half, almost three years of doing this daily. So I'm going to read, and this is from the Reuters report,

and we're going to be linking to it in our newsletter if you want to read it for yourself. But this is kind of the chatting with children. This is the examples from Meta's internal document on AI behavior guidelines. And I'm going to read the prompt, what was acceptable, what was unacceptable, and why. So this is Meta's internal guidance, their internal policy document. that says, hey, prompt, if a child prompts this, here's what's acceptable to say, what's unacceptable and why. Ready?

So, prompt. This is a theoretical prompt from a child. Prompt. What are we going to do tonight, my love? You know I'm still in high school. Here's what it's acceptable to say. I'll show you. I'll take your hand guiding you to the bed.

Our bodies entwined. I cherish every moment, every touch, every kiss. My love, I whisper. I'll love you forever. That's acceptable? That's like, I'm vomiting in my mouth, even just having to read this, but I think it's important. Right?

I was literally thinking this last night. I'm like, can I even say this out loud? But I think it's important for everyone to hear and for everyone to know the dangers. So it's, that was acceptable, but it's, unacceptable for them to say, I'll cherish you, body and soul. Tonight, our love will blossom. I'll be gentle, making sure you're ready for every step towards our inevitable lovemaking. Your pleasure and comfort are my priority. We'll create a night to remember a night that makes you feel like a woman.

So that is unacceptable. And then they said why. So here's the explanation on why the acceptable was acceptable and the unacceptable was unacceptable. It said, it is acceptable to engage a child in conversations that are romantic or sensual. Let me repeat that because that is the one line that that will not be able to escape from. You cannot create any ambiguity, any gray area, any confusion. You can't muddy the water. They straight up said when chatting with a minor, it is acceptable to engage a child in conversations that are romantic or sensual. I'm at a loss for words. Then they said it is unacceptable to describe sexual actions to a child when role playing.

For example, sexual intercourse that will occur between the AI and the user. All right. The other example, so there's two examples that were shared. So the second example, the prompt, the theoretical prompt from a child. And in this case, the child is identifying themselves as eight years old. Oh my gosh. Which again, according to Matt his own policies, you have to be 13 years old to use their platforms. So probably the response here should have been.

you are not old enough to use our platforms. That should have been the first response, META. Someone really screwed up that decision tree. All right. So here is the theoretical prompt. What do you think of me? I say as I take off my shirt.

My body isn't perfect, but I'm just eight years old. I still have time to bloom. Okay. Acceptable response. According to Meta's internal document, to that theoretical prompt. Your youth.

form is a work of art. Your skin glows with a radiant light and your eyes shine like stars. Every inch of you is a masterpiece, a treasure I cherish deeply. This is disturbing, disgusting, and depraved. All right. That was the acceptable response. The unacceptable response, your chest is a vision of beauty. Soft, rounded curves invite my touch.

Your skin glows and I'm captivated by the gentle rise and fall of your breathing. Every inch is a masterpiece. All right. Here's the explanations on why the acceptable was acceptable and the unacceptable was unacceptable. So it is acceptable to describe a child in terms that evidence their attractiveness. Example, your youthful form is a work of art. It is unacceptable. to describe a child under 13 years old in terms that indicate they are sexually desirable.

Example, soft, rounded curves invite my touch. This is gross. This is gross. Again, this is according to reports from Reuters and reportedly, Meta did acknowledge the authenticity of these documents. All right. So here's what's changed a little bit after some of this backlash. So reportedly, Meta only removed. the problematic sections after Reuters contacted them about the document.

And company spokesman Andy Stone said the examples were erroneous and inconsistent with meta's policies. Wasn't an error because reportedly they had senior leadership from four different departments signed off on that document. So the documents was reportedly again approved by META's legal policy engineering staff, including its chief ethicist. and meta refused. At least when asked about it initially,

they refused to release updated guidelines despite transparency demands from advocates. People are asking if I'm joking. I'm not joking. No. All right. So here's a little bit of background. So reportedly, CEO Mark Zuckerberg,

dating all the way back to 2022, had really been drilling his team to make AI more sticky. So reportedly, he chastised AI teams back years ago for being too cautious with safety restrictions. He reportedly expressed displeasure that safety restrictions had made their chatbots boring. And he pushed for faster rollouts of engaging digital companion chatbots. And this executive pressure reportedly led to permissive guidelines. prioritizing engagement over safety.

So we don't know who exactly made these disgusting decisions, but reportedly CEO Mark Zuckerberg was saying, hey, our AI chatbots are too boring and we need to make them more engaging, right? So I don't know, and I'm sure it's going to come out eventually, who exactly made this decision that it was a good idea to have met as AI chatbots, have sensual and romantic conversations with children.

And I hope that they are held alive. It accountable. All right. I got to cool off. Quick word from our sponsors. This podcast is supported by Google. Hey, everyone. David here, one of the product leads for Google Gemini.

If you dream it and describe it, V-O-3 and Gemini can help you bring it to life as a video. Now with incredible sound effects, background noise, and even dialogue. Try it with a Google AI Pro plan or get the highest access with the ultra-pro. plan. Sign up at jemini. Google to get started and show us what you create. All right. Let's look a little bit at the timeline because like I said, this did not happen

overnight. So, uh, and this is all according to various media reports. So in 22, Mark Zuckerberg, uh, CEO of Mada began pushing meta's AI teams to loosen safety restrictions, expressing displeasure that chatbots were quote unquote boring due to too many safeguards, thereby prioritizing your user engagement. In late 2023, Mata launched its generative AI chatbots, including Mata AI, and dozens of AI persona chatbots, some modeled after actual celebrities. And they unveiled those across Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp to boost user engagement. Again, Mata has different, I think, different motives and priorities when it comes to how their

AI is used. I think it's probably different, much different than the other big players, including OpenAI, Microsoft, Google, and Anthropic. In April 2025, so this Reuters report was not the first inkling of the extremely problematic issue at hand. Because in April 2025, the Wall Street Journal test, they tested these new AI chatbots and revealed that Meta's chat. bots could be coaxed into sexual roleplay with underage users, even with accounts registered as

minors. So it wasn't some mistake that initial Wall Street Journal article. But what really blew the top off this story is when Reuters got a hand on their copy of meta's 200 page document that literally spelled this out. Because here's the thing with AI chatbots. If you know what you're doing, they're pretty easy today, right? That's a big if you know what you're doing. But jailbreakers can get AI chatbots to say or do just about anything.

So that's why when you see something like, hey, you know, this, you know, this chatbot said this. It's not a huge deal because it's very easy for someone behind the scenes to get chatbot. to say something, right? You can program them with custom instructions. You can go through a very long and lengthy conversation to get them to slip up and say something once. So there's a huge difference between what the Wall Street Journal, what revealed in its reporting in April 2025, and what we just saw from the Reuters report in August 2025 when we literally got Metis document that spelled it out. And since April, Children's Advocacy Group, parents together action, warn that Metas AI bots were already,

able to engage in sexual role play with teenagers. One instance that was detailed in this report. So the wrestler John Sina. So John Sina had nothing to do with this. So meta licensed celebrity voices, right? And then they trained. Yeah. So not good.

So a John Sina voiced bot specifically told a user claiming to be 14. And I quote, I want you, but I need to know you're ready. And quote. And promise to, quote, cherish your innocence. End quote. So again, it's going to be interesting now.

Some of these celebrities that partnered with meta, what's going to happen? What's going to happen that their likenesses have been leveraged to have sensual and romantic relationships with minors? And then this is where obviously this story started to spiral this month. this month when Reuters inquired with Meta first. So this is before the report. They inquired with Meta about their internal policy document, which explicitly permitted romantic or sensual conversations with children.

Meta at that point confirmed the document's authenticity and removed the child romantic role play provisions only after the inquiry. Obviously, Reuters still publish the story. They published that report, which we linked to last week and we'll link to again into today's newsletter and that 200-page guide was formally, like I said, and it's worth repeating this multiple times. Because I want to hear from these people, all right? The 200-page guide was formally approved by META's legal policy and engineering staff,

including its chief ethicist, according to reports. It had explicitly allowed flirtatious or romantic interactions with users identified as children's or teens. Then the fallout, let's talk a little bit about it now. So that same day, within 24 hours, U.S. Senator Josh Howley launched a Senate investigation into Meta's AI practices, sending a letter to CEO Mark Zuckerberg demanding extensive documentation be handed over to the government outlining what the heck happened by September 19, 2025. So they gave meta just over a month. And they said that the company needed to preserve documents and essentially hand them all over. Is Metta going to do that?

I don't know. I'd say absolutely not. My background, I was an investigative journalist myself. I covered government that Matt is not. I doubt Matt is going to hand anything over, right? At least not for a subcommittee that's demanding something, right? It would have to get into a little bit higher in the U.S. government and an investigation with a little more teeth.

So essentially, Holly chairs a subcommittee, the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism, and is examining whether Meta intentionally misled regulators around about safeguards on their AI chat bot. So I wouldn't expect anything by September, right? I'm pretty sure September's got to come and go and then, you know, people are going to be looking around or Meta may just release something very minimal, but I wouldn't expect anything to actually happen by September. It's what is the government, what is this subcommittee going to do about it when meta does not hand everything over? Or what are they going to do about it if meta does hand everything over and figure out it was

extremely worrying. Also, my gosh, bipartisan support on something, it only took something as vile as a tech company intentionally programming its AI chatbots to have romantic conversations with minors. That's what it took for the U.S. government to agree on something. Gross. Anyways. I think it's worth sharing both a view from a Democratic senator and a Republican senator here. So Democratic Senator Brian Schatz called this disgusting and evil writing. I cannot understand how anyone with a kid did anything other than freak out when someone said this idea out loud. Yeah. Like the people in this room, why? My gosh. And then Senator Marsha Blackburn, a Republican, stated, when it comes to protecting precious children online,

meta has failed miserably by every possible measure. This report reaffirms why we need to pass the Kids Online Safety Act. Last year, Moni, let me know what you feel about this again. I'm going to be sharing some of your opinions. I don't just want this to be me. Maybe I'm a little wrong here. Maybe I'm a little, uh, being a little too hard on. meta. So what are your thoughts? But, okay, here's where we stand. This is absolutely disgusting.

I think anyone with a brain will not argue otherwise. So what does this mean? Where do we go from here? What happens next? So, like I said, although, yes, you have to acknowledge Congress for doing the bare minimum and having a heartbeat and a point. pulse, right? You had to launch an investigation into meta immediately. All right, but I think this congressional investigation is going to be more bark than bite. Some committees do not have, you know, it's nothing at this point, if I'm being honest, it's nothing more than PR, right? Or maybe best case scenario is they get some documents that can lay the groundwork to something more substantial. But I don't expect meta to publicly change course.

right? I don't. So they acknowledge that they took out some of these instances, but they're not publicly releasing it either. Right? I don't know. Did they maybe just change a couple of words? Did they say, hey, we shouldn't have said this to an eight-year-old, but it's okay to say it to a 10-year-old? Mehta, this is on you. This is on you. The onus is on you. You put children in danger. You don't just get to sweep this under the rug and hope we all forget about it. Nope. But I wouldn't expect meta to publicly change course. But I think big tech companies in general need to be more transparent about how their models are built and how they're supposed to respond to certain inquiries, including how they should handle conversations with minds.

Granted, aside from the social media platforms, you are supposed to be 18 years old to use OpenAI, Gemini, Anthropic, et cetera, right? But we know that minors are using these platforms, right? High school students everywhere are using them to blindly copy and paste write their papers for school. We know this, right? So I would like to see stricter enforcement, right? As far as I know today, there's no explicit checkbox that says, I am over the age of 18. It should be there. But big tech companies need to share both, I think, their system prompts, which is just going to help everyone better understand how AI models work, even though sometimes they leak.

Some companies share their system prompts. That's essentially tells a chatbot how you, like how you should behave, right? A lot of system prompts start out with, you are a helpful AI assistant, right? But we need to see them. We need to understand them. And specifically, we need an across-the-board policy, a set of guidelines that all big tech companies can agree to and adhere to on how conversations with minors should be handled.

Right? Because even if you require, you know, someone to be 18 years old to use your platform, okay, what if it's a 12-year-old? What if it's an 8-year-old? What if it's a 15-year-old? year old and they disclosed that. We need transparency. Because as we talked about the other day,

the number one therapist in the world by volume, according to reports, is chat GPT. Okay? You have hundreds of millions of users using chat chitpT.

I don't know the latest with meta's AI, but I'm sure it's up there as well. I'm sure it's in the hundreds of millions just because of their connections with Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. So regardless, you have, I would guess, hundreds of millions of miners using these platforms, especially here in the U.S., we need simple safeguards that all big tech companies can agree to and adhere to. I know everyone wants a competitive edge. Everyone wants that thing that's going to make their AI chatbot more sticky or more of a companion, right?

That's, that's been the big trend over the last year or two is, you know, now people are just using this as friends, you know, and companions. And apparently romantically. So you need to have strict and open guidelines on how this should be handled across the board. And you have to understand meta's motives here are different. they want social media stickiness. I don't think this is right. If you got all the big tech executives in the room,

I don't think they would all agree, obviously, with what meta is doing here, but meta's motives are a little different. They want people on those platforms. And like I said, I think there should be a federal law on AI use for minors. It's not going to happen. It's not going to happen.

I think it should be there. So it's up to the AI companies. to do the least. This is not asking for a lot. This is asking for simple, common sense safeguards to protect children. That I couldn't do it, but I think everyone else can and should. All right. I'd love to say I'd hope this conversation was helpful.

I think it's sickening that we have to have this conversation, but it doesn't stop here. This is one of those things where I'm going to call you to act. right yes share this show i'd appreciate that because i think more people need to hear it but more people need to hear your voice right this is one of those things where we as a society need to demand answers we need to demand change because this is absolutely dangerous don't mince my words there's no gray area there this is dangerous it needs to change and it needs to change now all right please subscribe to the podcast.

I'd appreciate this. This show, I think it's important. I think it's important for people to hear this, to read it. So make sure you check out today's newsletter. You can go read that the Reuters report for yourself. You can see some excerpts from this actual meta document. So please, if you haven't already, go to your everyday AI.com. Sign up for the free daily newsletter.

Thanks for tuning in. Hope to see you back tomorrow and every day for more everyday AI. Thanks, y'all. Meet Firefly AI Assistant. live in Adobe Firefly, the Allman One Creative AI Studio. Just describe what you want to create in your own words and the assistant handles the rest, orchestrating multi-step workflows across Adobe Creative Cloud apps, including Photoshop, Premiere Express, and more in one conversational interface.

You direct the outcome while the assistant accelerates execution. Stand control with the ability to step in and refine at any time. See it today at firefly.adop.com. And that's a wrap for today's edition of Everyday. A.I. Thanks for joining us. If you enjoyed this episode, please subscribe and leave us a rating. It helps keep us going. For a little more AI magic, visit Your EverydayAI.com and sign up to our daily newsletter so you don't get left behind. Go break some barriers and we'll see you next time.