3 ms·
> bans It feels extremely naive to think that all bans are a bad thing. Let's say that a criminal org starts a fully automated system to scam grandmas out of
by consumer451 4y ago
> bans
It feels extremely naive to think that all bans are a bad thing.
Let's say that a criminal org starts a fully automated system to scam grandmas out of their savings. A cloud based service could ban them. A self-hosted system could not.
- lolc 4y agoThe same argument would work for a printer. Or nmap. It would be safer to not let people have these tools. Because criminals do make use of them too. Yet it is widely regarded as a good thing that nmap can be distributed and printers can be bought. Why are these models special?
- paulryanrogers 4y agoThey can fool the elderly by imitating their offspring, increasingly convincingly and at scale? Whereas nmap and printers cannot (yet)
- lolc 4y agoPrinters are often used to produce convincing fakes.
- welshwelsh 4y agoIf it was possible to guarantee that only felony-level criminal activity is banned, you might have a point. Realistically though and as we have seen with ChatGPT, if models can be censored they will be censored to the point where it affects normal people. Most people using chatbots have experienced "as an AI model, I can't do that" because of bullshit ethics. So... sorry about your savings Grandma, but I'm still going to fight for uncensored AI models. Fraud is already illegal, and if it happens we can prosecute the offenders.
- jstarfish 4y agoActually laughed at loud at "we can prosecute the offenders." We've prosecuted what, one (or two?) Nigerian princes in my lifetime. Grandma isn't leaving you anything when she passes if all of her savings were plundered by scammers while she was still alive. Preventing elder abuse is in your best interest.