4 ms·
That's interesting how this appears right after much severe "I'll refrain from providing code that involve concepts as you're under 18" Gemini response[1]. By "
by Lockal 3y ago
That's interesting how this appears right after much severe "I'll refrain from providing code that involve concepts as you're under 18" Gemini response[1]. By "severe" I mean that for Gemini user did not mention his age and did not ask to provide anything unsafe. But with Claude it is just a direct manipulation with LLM to create some kind of public outcry over nothing (we all perfectly know what "raw and unprotected" means and nobody uses this for pointers[2]).
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39583473 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39583473
[2] https://www.google.com/search?q=%22raw+and+unprotected+pointers%22 https://www.google.com/search?q=%22raw+and+unprotected+point...
- PartiallyTyped 3y agoThe Gemini did not mention his age, but it was provided as part of details given to the LLM about the user from google. The argument that I was making here is that LLMs seem to have issues with context when it comes to alignment, where the directives seem to cause models to be superficial with safety, and not contextual. Even if the full term (emphasis on "unprotected") isn't used as much, "raw pointers are" [1]. Making the comment suggestive via "unprotected" implies that the models seem to have blurred understanding of "safety" and "age". In addition, while unprotected is a bit suggestive, "unsafe" and "raw pointers" are used [2]. [1] https://kagi.com/search?q=raw+pointers https://kagi.com/search?q=raw+pointers [2] https://kagi.com/search?q=raw+and+unprotected+pointers https://kagi.com/search?q=raw+and+unprotected+pointers