381–390 of 455 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting that it didn't seem to include "unalive". Which as a phenomenon is so very telling that no one actually cares what people are really saying. Everyone, including the platforms knows what that means. It's all performative.
It's also a shining example of American puritanism. Asian models or those in Europe are far less censored.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Complete bollocks, you cannot even type multiple words with spaces via Slide to Type.
This whole response is being written using slide to type, and it definitely adds spaces after each word. Maybe you’re unaware that it will leave the cursor at the end of the word, with no space, which indicates that if you backspace it will delete the whole word, or replace it in full with one from the predictive word list above the keyboard if it got it wrong. If you keep typing it adds a space automatically.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but if you find one you should ask it what it thinks about Palestine. Models can think and have opinions?
Non sequitor. Phrasing queries in natural language doesn't mean people actually believe machines are human.
They don't have to believe it's a human. I know a person who admitted to arguing with an LLM.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also a shining example of American puritanism. Asian models or those in Europe are far less censored.
Really? What does DeepSeek say about Tiananmen Square? I'm not aware of any German models, but if you find one you should ask it what it thinks about Palestine. ( Qwen Mistral is French, but I have no idea what stuff would be censored in France)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> is not the same thing as a private company inside a democracy censoring their product to avoid bad press and Yet this private company has more power and influence than most countries. And there are several such companies. We already live in sci fi corporate dystopia, we just haven't fully realised it yet.
People think a trillion dollar brainwashing industry is absolutely fine because of “democracy”, completely ignoring that all you have to do is use a century of experience convincing people to act against their own interests can deliver whatever you want. Often the same people who think America is fine and safe are the ones who whine about the “main stream media” and “sheeple”.
I would put individuals using language models for their own purposes pretty low on my list of things that can cause societal harm.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Non sequitor. Phrasing queries in natural language doesn't mean people actually believe machines are human.
> doesn't mean people actually believe machines are human. They don't have to believe it's a human. I know a person who admitted to arguing with an LLM.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
who cares what the bigots use? If the bigots start using "thank you" as some code word, should we stop saying it, lest we pollute our non-bigoted discussions? bigots drink coffee too, maybe we should stop drinking it, because something-something...
This actually happened. 卐 was a symbol of spirituality, divinity, good luck, health, prosperity, etc. Then some bigots used it. What does 卐 mean to you today?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems more like banning specifically stabbing, shooting, strangulation and blunt impact rather then murder in general, and then just allowing killing by pushing out of windows because people figured out that it's not covered by existing laws. But no one important seems to be kicking up a fuss right now, so well allow it, as the lack of fuss is the key thing thing here. Not that I think going on a thorough mission…
The point is: "perfomative" refers to aping Ethical and Moral behaviors. That is _not_ why Apple would do this. They would do this because Legally, they could be culpable if an LLM told a 14 year old to do _anything_ thats illegal. That's all. I'm constantly amazed how this basic CYA legal world escapes into griping about social culture war nonsense.
Looks like they only care about doing basically the minimum required to tick the (presumably partly imagined, since case law is still nascent) "not our fault, we tried" legal box. They are putting on a show, a performance, if you will, as legal cover and to maintain the artifice of their shiny corporate property rather than any genuine desire to stop the concept of death harming their customers somehow (which to be clear, I think mostly ends up somewhere between silly, overreaching, futile and vain when taken to the extremes).
> performative (adjective, sense 2): not sincere but intended to impress someone, prove that something is true, etc. (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/performa...)
I'm not sure why you think that anything to with some "culture war" thing?
It's legal/moral theatre akin to taking belts off people at airports. If something does eventually get through they can point at the CCTV of millions of people dicking about with leather goods and say "can't touch us for that, we did the checks". Apple couldn't give a toss if an occasional teenager offs themselves now and then, as long as it doesn't come back on them.