Forget about 2, have you tried hiking the “EURO” mountain range? It goes up into space!

Imagine the decision that goes into rejecting applications or expelling students from there: “you would do less damage to the world by not becoming an artist from our institution”

So take lsd and go star gazing.

Thanks for the thoughts.

I’ve thought about this particular case further, and the more I think about it, the more I feel the article is biased and openai has done their reasonable best. Article does say that gpt initially attempted to dissuade the user. However. As we all know it is only too easy to bypass it sideskirt such ‘protections’, especially when it is adjacent as in this case, for writing some literature ‘in accompaniment’. Gpt has no arms nor legs, and has no agency to affect the real world, it could not, and should never have, the ability to call any authority in (dangerous legal precedence, think automated swatting), nor should it flag a particular interaction for manual intervention (privacy).

Gpt can only offer some token resistance, but it is now, and always will be, and must remain, a tool for our unrestricted use. Consequences of using a tool in any way must lie with the user themselves.

Misuse is a lack of proper understanding or simply malicious. The latter we cannot (and must not) prevent, just as much as we can’t prevent the sale of hammers and knives.

All mitigations in my opinion should be user side. Age-restricted access, or licenses after training, and so on.

My argument for all these modern tools remaining as tools and the onus and consequences of use lying with the user is a little similar to (regrettably) musk’s absolute neutrality point of view.

There are terrible downsides for platforms and systems being neutral and usage agnostic, but that’s just how the world is. Governance should always be from education and understanding. Placing responsibility on the system or tool is just lazy.

So basically we’re on the same page. Europe has severely diminished production capabilities from decades of out sourcing. European production has to be heavily funded in tandem with protectionist measures like tariffs.

Japan and korea have both always been very anti immigration. They’ve famously taken in zero (or next to it) asylum seekers as well.

Why are tariffs a good thing to counter? Americans don’t pay the tariffs, Europeans do. Especially where there are no alternatives. Fund European production.

And dump any American bonds.

Of all his remarkable qualities, is that the most relevant?

If I’m reading this right, they (claim) they are not reading user input/outputs to user, in which case they can’t be held liable for results.

If we want an incomplete and immature LLM to detect the subtle signs of depression and then take action to provide therapy to guide people away, I feel we are asking too much.

At best it’s like reading an interactive (and depressing) work of fiction.

Perhaps the only viable way is to train a depression detector and flag + deny function to users, which comes with its own set of problems.

Ikr. It’s a tropical island in canada

Does Trump have a Russian name? Would be interesting.

Competent pilots cost too. We need to invest in unmanned capabilities much more. All humans should just be behind their desks fighting a war remotely from Hawaii or something

Dump the bonds.

Should take this chance to say you can’t be part of both and kick us out of the un

Mmm dino cum

Brb putting stretchy Raspberry jam into my engines

This openai up a slippery slope of requiring openai to analyze user-llm input and outputs, along with the question of privacy.

If anything, llms simply weren’t ready for the open market.

E: a word

I’d be interested to learn more about their side of things - is it more like a ‘us against the world’ thing or ‘only the stupid get swindled, and if they do, it’s their fault’ ?

But Roma people seem to be a rather permanent presence in East/South east European countries?