> I'd suggest that any reasonable person drawing a conclusion would clearly know he was worse. You can't base any assumption on the existence of a reasonable p

> I'd suggest that any reasonable person drawing a conclusion would clearly know he was worse. You can't base any assumption on the existence of a reasonable person without defining "reasonable" very specifically - we all reason in a social context and defer to norms whenever possible. We all know Hitler was the worst because we keep telling each other Hitler was the worst. He wasn't responsible for the most deaths, he wasn't the meanest or cruelest person ever, etc. If/when people stop teaching about Hitler as "He was the worst," people will stop learning that he was the worst. Or they might learn nothing about him, like how in my US education we learned next-to-nothing about Stalin and many people I know are pretty ambiguous about the ethics of being Stalin. And so then when a stupid LLM tries to draw a comparison between Hitler and anyone else who isn't an architect of genocide, and puts those 2 people in the same context, and doesn't say "genocide is way fucking worse than grifting", we lose some of that cultural context that tells us genocide is way fucking worse than grifting.