5 ms·
Wait, are they actually arguing that placing arbitrary restrictions on word selection will actually have any kind of effect? This is something we teach in midd
by rolenthedeep 4y ago
Wait, are they actually arguing that placing arbitrary restrictions on word selection will actually have any kind of effect?
This is something we teach in middle school writing as a stylistic requirement. It doesn't actually change the content or intent of the writing, it just looks "better" if that's what you're grading on.
Placing restrictions on words simply means that other words will be used to work around it. Plenty of online systems have profanity filters, but that doesn't actually improve the environment, people just find words that aren't in the filter and curse at each other anyway.
- skybrian 4y agoThe way I interpret this argument is that a chatbot's "default character" shouldn't behave like it's a person you can chat with. Maybe it should refuse any questions about itself? "Sir, this is a Wendy's." Refusing to do things it can't really do is good UI, guiding people who aren't trolling towards more productive ways to use the tool. Tools don't need to be general-purpose to be useful. The people who want to troll it into saying weird things will still find ways to succeed, but if it's clear from the full output that they're trolling then maybe nobody should care?
- jamilton 4y agoIt might prevent users from anthropomorphizing LLMs as much.