Sticking a bunch of disclaimers onto cyanide doesn't mean that it is useful to describe it as almond milk. If they had done an adequate and accurate job explai

Sticking a bunch of disclaimers onto cyanide doesn't mean that it is useful to describe it as almond milk. If they had done an adequate and accurate job explaining what, if any, plausible value or potential Galactica had, warnings would not have to have to carry so much weight. Or their PR could have focused on their tricks and optimizations, and not characterised Galactica at all. Instead they'll be known as the people who described a science flavored word salad generator as if it was a tool useful for "summarize academic literature, solve math problems, generate Wiki articles, write scientific code, annotate molecules and proteins, and more" If they had, for example, positioned this as a tool for creating unscientific, but academic sounding anti-vax propaganda, people could have questioned their morals, but not the "fitness to purpose" of their tool.