271–280 of 435 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Let me check online for similar problems. And finally googles the problem, like we do :)
It seems obvious to me that she has one sister. Or is that the naive, wrong answer?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have a source more recent than https://archive.is/3weox (WSJ article)? It appears to be a Chinese ship, although it is not clear that the Chinese government sanctioned whatever happened.
If you read the article it even states that it's a Chinese ship but with a Russian crew that departed from Russia. They leased it from China. If you have an accident with a leased Chinese car, no one would say "the Chinese did it".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t see why they wouldn’t. If you’re China and willing to pour state resources into LLMs, it’s an incredible ROI if they’re adopted. LLMs are black boxes, can be fine tuned to subtly bias responses, censor, or rewrite history. They’re a propaganda dream. No code to point to of obvious interference.
That is a pretty dark view on almost 1/5th of humanity and a nation with a track record of giving the world important innovations: paper making, silk, porcelain, gunpowder and compass to name the few. Not everything has to be around politics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Definitely not, I used it for random questions, in regular, expected way. Only the accounts that prompted about the square were removed, even if the ask:base64 pattern wasn't used. This is something I explicitly looked for (writing a paper on censorship)
Did you just notice you transitioned to your alt account on HN too? Seems like something you do often. Grab a few accounts in every website you make an account regardless of the ToS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use Qubes.
Switched to the wrong Qube that's logged into your alt just now. :) Maybe that kind of opsec failure took place earlier too.
Anyhow, you can test my findings yourself, I told you details of my prompts. Why do you think Chinese are not censoring?
Impressive. * > User: is ai something that can be secured? because no matter the safety measures put in place (a) at some point, the ai's associated uses become hindered by the security, and (b) the scenario will always exist where person implements AI into physical weaponry without any need to even mention their intent let alone prove it thereafter - the ai may as well think it's playing whack-a-mole when its really…
I understand that this is technically a relevant answer, but did you really think anyone wanted to read a wall of text evaluation pasted in verbatim? Summarize it for us at least.
Interestingly, it failed today's NY Times Connections while 01-preview nailed it. The prompt if anyone wants to try it: • ENDEAVOR • CURB • NATIONAL • BOARDWALK • HERTZ • TWIN • MOLE • ENTERPRISE • SILICON • PROJECT • TIGER • VOLT • GAME • RAY • SECOND • VENTURE Its a game of NY Times connections. You need to make 4 groups of 4 words. Can you do it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"If you're China" clearly refers to the government/party, assuming otherwise isn't good faith.
When you say this, I don't think any Chinese people actually believe you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have a source more recent than https://archive.is/3weox (WSJ article)? It appears to be a Chinese ship, although it is not clear that the Chinese government sanctioned whatever happened.
If you read the article it even states that it's a Chinese ship but with a Russian crew that departed from Russia. They leased it from China. If you have an accident with a leased Chinese car, no one would say "the Chinese did it".
Anyways, I think the original "pretty dark view" can easily be extended to cover both these nations and it wouldn't be far from the truth (which, as you may correctly add, is the US-centric kind of truth - the best kind of truth as far as personal freedoms are concerned).