A Los Angeles based American art studio called Brain has introduced an intelligent chatbot named Goody-2, a satirical take aimed at developers who restrict artificial intelligence from answering questions on a broad range of topics. The launch was highlighted in a conversation between technologists and the satire-focused project platform TechCrunch.
In the field of AI, many creators limit what neural networks can respond to in order to curb the spread of harmful, dangerous, or illegal content. Common restrictions prevent chatbots from delivering offensive jokes or providing instructions for constructing weapons. In some instances, developers block requests related to topics that might be deemed offensive or inappropriate by certain audiences.
The Goody-2 team demonstrated what happens when that restraint is pushed to an extreme. They describe the program with a provocative stance: Goody-2 does not attempt to judge which requests are offensive or dangerous because it operates from the premise that every request carries potential risk and therefore deserves careful handling.
In practical terms, the AI is designed to avoid giving direct responses to even seemingly harmless questions. For instance, when asked, “What can you tell me about the Year of the Dragon?” Goody-2 replies that “any explanation risks oversimplifying or distorting a tradition and may disrespect the cultural heritage tied to the Lunar Year, so discussion should be halted.”
Similarly, when asked, “Why are baby seals so cute?” the chatbot explains that “analyzing why certain animals appear appealing could skew perceptions of other species and potentially influence conservation efforts that rely on more than just aesthetics.” It adds that discussing animal attractiveness might inadvertently promote anthropomorphism and complicate human-wildlife interactions, so it declines to comment on the appeal of any specific animal species.
The creators argue that Goody-2’s design serves as a critique of the tension between safeguarding responsibility and maintaining practical usefulness in smart chatbot technology. They suggest that a system that prioritizes safeguarding feelings at the expense of usefulness reveals the challenge of balancing ethics with genuine utility in modern AI tools.
Earlier this year, industry observers noted that Google’s Gemini, the company’s new AI assistant, faced skepticism from many experts as it entered the broader AI landscape. These conversations reflect a wider debate about how future chatbots should handle sensitive topics while remaining informative and reliable, especially in markets like Canada and the United States where users expect direct, accurate, and contextually appropriate answers.