3 ms·
It is more accurate to say they are thinking in terms of “brand safety” or liability, that is, being safe from being blamed for making a mean robot.
by binary132 2y ago
It is more accurate to say they are thinking in terms of “brand safety” or liability, that is, being safe from being blamed for making a mean robot.
- sourcepluck 2y agoWell, if one of OpenAI's LLMs started quoting Mein Kampf in its answers to people, would you laugh, or would you not laugh? That's the question.
- binary132 2y agoyour fallacy is: reductio ad hitlerum
- sourcepluck 2y ago> Reductio ad Hitlerum (Latin for "reduction to Hitler"), also known as playing the Nazi card, is an attempt to invalidate someone else's argument on the basis that the same idea was promoted or practised by Adolf Hitler or the Nazi Party. I can't tell if you're being serious, or joking, or what. In any case, there's the actual definition, and I don't see how it applies whatsoever. I was not disagreeing with you in the first place? Perhaps there's simply a misunderstanding. reduction ad hitlerum =/= "mentioning hitler in any way"
- binary132 2y agoOk. Usually if someone suggests that you might laugh at a Mein Kampf quote in response to your argument, they are not doing it in good faith.