Scottish Grandmother Receives Offensive Message due to Apple AI Transcription Error

An AI system (Apple's voice-to-text service) was involved and malfunctioned by inserting inappropriate content into a transcribed message. This malfunction directly caused harm to the recipient (emotional distress from receiving an insulting and inappropriate message) and indirectly to the garage (reputational harm). The harm is realized and directly linked to the AI system's malfunction, fitting the definition of an AI Incident.

An AI system (Apple's speech-to-text service) was used to transcribe a voicemail message. Due to challenges with the Scottish accent and background noise, the AI mis-transcribed 'sixth' as 'sex' and included offensive language. This led to the grandmother receiving an insulting message. The AI system's malfunction directly caused harm in the form of emotional distress and reputational harm to the garage and customer. Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident because the AI system's malfunction directly led to harm to a person (emotional harm).

The event clearly involves an AI system (Apple's voice-to-text transcription service) whose malfunction directly caused harm by producing an offensive and inappropriate message. The AI system's failure to accurately transcribe the voicemail led to emotional harm to the recipient and reputational harm to the garage. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI system's malfunction directly led to harm to a person (emotional distress) and harm to a community/business (reputational damage).

The AI system (voice-to-text transcription) malfunctioned by producing offensive and vulgar content that was not present in the original message. This caused emotional harm and reputational damage to the recipient and potentially the sender. The involvement of the AI system's malfunction directly led to this harm, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident under harm to persons (emotional distress) and harm to communities (offensive content dissemination). Therefore, this event qualifies as an AI Incident.

An AI system (Apple's voice-to-text transcription) was involved and malfunctioned by producing a vulgar and inappropriate transcription. This malfunction directly caused harm to the individual by sending offensive content, which can be considered harm to a person (emotional/psychological harm). Therefore, this qualifies as an AI Incident due to the AI system's malfunction leading to harm.

The AI system (Apple's voice-to-text) malfunctioned during use, producing a harmful output that misrepresented the original message and caused distress to the user. This meets the criteria for an AI Incident because the AI's malfunction directly led to harm (emotional distress and reputational harm) to a person. The involvement of the AI system is explicit, and the harm is realized, not just potential. Therefore, this event qualifies as an AI Incident.

The event explicitly involves an AI system (Apple's Visual Voicemail transcription AI) whose malfunction caused a harmful outcome: an offensive and inappropriate transcription message sent to a user. The harm is realized and direct, involving emotional distress and reputational damage. The AI system's failure to accurately transcribe the voicemail and the lack of safeguards to prevent offensive outputs led to this incident. This fits the definition of an AI Incident because the AI's malfunction directly caused harm to a person. The article also discusses broader issues with AI transcription errors and previous AI-related errors by Apple, but the core event is a realized harm from AI malfunction, not just a potential hazard or complementary information.

An AI system (Apple's AI-powered Visual Voicemail transcription) is explicitly involved, and it malfunctioned by producing an incorrect and offensive transcription. However, there is no indication that this malfunction caused any direct or indirect harm such as injury, violation of rights, or disruption. The user found the incident shocking but humorous, and no harm or damage is reported. Therefore, this is a malfunction of an AI system without resulting harm, and thus does not meet the threshold for an AI Incident or AI Hazard. It is best classified as Complementary Information about an AI system's error and its social impact.