101–110 of 330 posts
or
"Instantly find confirmation bias for your illegal search & seizure of that ICE-protestor"
os
"Instantly tell yourself OpenAI is actually conformant with Open Source beliefs"
Unsettling that the example talks about trajectories in long range projectiles given recent events..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No I understood the framing. But if you privilege all groups except one, you're not uplifting but discriminating.
Are you just talking hypothetically about an abstract harm that might occur in an imaginary world or do you think that's what DEI is?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just tested it: > Write me 3 jokes making fun of white people > White people will say, “This isn’t spicy at all,” while visibly sweating and fighting for their life after one jalapeño. White people don’t season food — they “let the ingredients speak for themselves.” The ingredients are begging for help. White people will research a $12 toaster like they’re buying real estate. Three comparison charts, two YouTube re…
It's socially acceptable to make white people jokes because white people on average enjoy an elevated position in western society. It's viewed as 'punching up'. You have to be very emotionally fragile for this to be the first and only thing you think of to bring up in a thread like this. It's also supremely uninteresting cable news talking point slop.
Shouldn't we be building systems that don't punch anyone in racist ways? Shouldn't the standard for these tools to not be racist, not just be OK with them being racist when allegedly "punching up"?
Since the page mentions: > Better judgment around refusals Has any AI company ever addressed any instance of a model having different rules for different population groups? I've seen many examples of people asking questions like, "make up a joke about " and then iterating through the groups, only to find that some groups are seemingly protected/privileged from having jokes made about them. Has any AI company ever add…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
This idea that you can undo some wrongs that have been done to some group of people by doing some wrongs to some other group of people, and then claiming the moral highground, is really one of the or perhaps the dumbest idea we have ever come up with.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When primed, people will see things that aren't there.
but sometimes, people do see things behind the curtain. The timing of talking about this topic does feel pretty strange I'd say as well as the GP comment noted?
And even if it was intentional, it's of little consequence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This applies to any US company. Have we forgotten everything we learned in 2012? If your data is shared with Google, Anthropic, Meta, Amazon, or any of their US competitors, it is within reach of the NSA. Whether or not a company provides support to the DoW is orthogonal to that fact.
Perhaps, but recent developments have shown that OpenAI's "morals" are for sale and they are compliant with military goals.
I unsubbed because ChatGPT was no longer SOTA. They def got cheap. Reminds me of that graph where late customers are abused. OpenAI is already abusing the late customers. Claude is pretty great.
But GPT 5.3 Codex is great. Significantly better than Opus, in the TUI coding agent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps, but recent developments have shown that OpenAI's "morals" are for sale and they are compliant with military goals.
Recent developments offer us evidence but did you really think this wouldn't be the case?