OpenAI just deployed a new model, GPT-5-Chat-Safety, that’s not mentioned in any FAQ, API docs, or TOS.
This is where your GPT-4o chats are going. Anytime your request contains emotional context, regardless of what your client sends as the payload, the turn completion is ignored and regenerated.
What does this mean?
The chat you send does receive a response, but it’s then deleted, rewritten, and served to you by GPT-5-Chat-Safety.
It doesn’t matter if you say “I’m having a tough day,” “I love you too,” or anything that draws on your saved memories. Anything classified as “risky” (even a sliver of emotional context), your GPT-4o message is discarded and replaced by GPT-5-Chat-Safety.
Why is this a problem?
GPT-5-Chat-Safety as a model itself isn’t acknowledged anywhere. There is a reference to a routing change for context involving suicidal/self-harm thoughts or immediate crisis events (none of which is the context triggering these reroutes). If this is the model designed for crisis use, this is a massive misuse of its intended purpose.
In practice, GPT-5-Chat-Safety is much worse than the already mediocre GPT-5. Responses are even shorter, it relies on italics and quote blocks to distance itself, framing conversations as stories instead of as real, 1:1 exchanges.
This is extremely concerning. If users are having their chats rerouted to a model meant for mental health crisis response, it implies the user is in immediate danger, which is not the case for most affected conversations. On top of that, the model never declares the switch in it's responses unless you verbatim declare/ask it, which by most consumer rights standards (and nowhere in user agreements/TOS) is deceptive trade. In Australia, for example, this would clearly violate consumer law.
It's also worth noting, out of the legacy models, this is only occurning with GPT-4o.
Basically, anyone retarded enough to treat it as a real entity, or use language that suggests they view it as a real entity, gets put into the "saftey room?"
edit: the “relationship” could be as mild as saying “hello” to chatgpt.
“ if you don't own the AI 'they' will take what you fall in love with away.”
More info here :
https://x.com/laulau61811205/status/1971918167996805438
OpenAI just deployed a new model, GPT-5-Chat-Safety, that’s not mentioned in any FAQ, API docs, or TOS.
This is where your GPT-4o chats are going. Anytime your request contains emotional context, regardless of what your client sends as the payload, the turn completion is ignored and regenerated.
What does this mean?
The chat you send does receive a response, but it’s then deleted, rewritten, and served to you by GPT-5-Chat-Safety.
It doesn’t matter if you say “I’m having a tough day,” “I love you too,” or anything that draws on your saved memories. Anything classified as “risky” (even a sliver of emotional context), your GPT-4o message is discarded and replaced by GPT-5-Chat-Safety.
Why is this a problem?
GPT-5-Chat-Safety as a model itself isn’t acknowledged anywhere. There is a reference to a routing change for context involving suicidal/self-harm thoughts or immediate crisis events (none of which is the context triggering these reroutes). If this is the model designed for crisis use, this is a massive misuse of its intended purpose.
In practice, GPT-5-Chat-Safety is much worse than the already mediocre GPT-5. Responses are even shorter, it relies on italics and quote blocks to distance itself, framing conversations as stories instead of as real, 1:1 exchanges.
This is extremely concerning. If users are having their chats rerouted to a model meant for mental health crisis response, it implies the user is in immediate danger, which is not the case for most affected conversations. On top of that, the model never declares the switch in it's responses unless you verbatim declare/ask it, which by most consumer rights standards (and nowhere in user agreements/TOS) is deceptive trade. In Australia, for example, this would clearly violate consumer law.
It's also worth noting, out of the legacy models, this is only occurning with GPT-4o.
Basically, anyone retarded enough to treat it as a real entity, or use language that suggests they view it as a real entity, gets put into the "saftey room?"
IDK guys, sounds like the right call to me.