I feel like this is an open problem because its the wrong approach. Censoring AI makes little sense - its like censoring what I can and cannot write on paper.

I feel like this is an open problem because its the wrong approach. Censoring AI makes little sense - its like censoring what I can and cannot write on paper. A pen that only allows me to write nice words, or a dictionary with no "controversial" words, or a history book without any controversial people or content, is not useful. AI is a tool, and it makes sense for that tool, if emulating human behavior, to respond with controversial and illegal content if prompted to do so. The obvious (to me) approach would be to handle this like any other case - let it generate whateever its prompted to generate. It wont generate horrible war crimes when asked about the weather. The people asking it for porn roleplay, or recipes for crystal meth, are deriving value from that. If they end up actually making crystal meth, its on THEM, not the LLM, arguably. You wouldn't ban all true crime books just because someone may reproduce a crime from the book, or be offended at it. All this censorship is is OpenAI wanting to stay trendy and make a clean, sanitized, happy corporate yes man monkey. And for that, maybe they should have trained the LLM on wikipedia only.