3 ms·

While we are at it, let's also get all the weapon manufacturers. How dare they hide behind "we are just making a tool" and "we are not responsible for what our

While we are at it, let's also get all the weapon manufacturers. How dare they hide behind "we are just making a tool" and "we are not responsible for what our users do". And don't get me started on people using cars to cause harm to others, why is nobody going after big auto?

arcatech 9mo ago
Flattening the discussion to “everything is actually exactly the same” isn’t helpful. This situation is not the same as a person driving a vehicle.
llmslave2 9mo ago
No, because Grok or ChatGPT etc are not tools, they are services. It doesn't matter if Grok uses an LLM or a bunch of people using Photoshop, if they are outputting illegal content the consequences should be the same. People don't go after big auto because they sell cars that other people drive. If they suddenly started offering a service where they would drive people around in their cars, and they started crashing into other people, of course they would be responsible for that.
janice1999 9mo ago
What an unserious response. Gun manufacturer accountability (or lack thereof) is a complex topic and one with ongoing lawsuits and evolving legal arguments. (In the USA see the Bush-era NRA-backed Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act in 2005 and recent Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Mexico arguments). Personally if a gun manufacturer markets a gun with the primary feature being finger print resistant (yes, that's real) and being easy to carry concealed, I think lawmakers should investigate. Likewise f someone makes a big CSAM generator button and puts it in front of millions of users, it also deserves legal attention.
- TrainedMonkey 9mo ago
  It was an unserious response to an absolutist statement. I pointing out where such absolutism would lead if applied to other areas. I don't think fingerprint scanner on guns will be effective as it tracks ownership and not legality of usage. However, a number of modern vehicles do have capabilities to perform autonomous actions, including overriding user input.
  - llmslave2 9mo ago
    It's not an absolutist statement and it doesn't lead to any of the insane conclusions you came up with. Holding the people running a model liable for what it generates has nothing to do with making tool makers liable.
- xigoi 9mo ago
  It’s not a CSAM generation button, it’s a general content generation button that someone used to generate CSAM, and it’s that someone who is responsible for it.

arcatech 9mo ago

Flattening the discussion to “everything is actually exactly the same” isn’t helpful. This situation is not the same as a person driving a vehicle.

llmslave2 9mo ago

No, because Grok or ChatGPT etc are not tools, they are services. It doesn't matter if Grok uses an LLM or a bunch of people using Photoshop, if they are outputting illegal content the consequences should be the same. People don't go after big auto because they sell cars that other people drive. If they suddenly started offering a service where they would drive people around in their cars, and they started crashing into other people, of course they would be responsible for that.

janice1999 9mo ago

What an unserious response. Gun manufacturer accountability (or lack thereof) is a complex topic and one with ongoing lawsuits and evolving legal arguments. (In the USA see the Bush-era NRA-backed Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act in 2005 and recent Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Mexico arguments). Personally if a gun manufacturer markets a gun with the primary feature being finger print resistant (yes, that's real) and being easy to carry concealed, I think lawmakers should investigate. Likewise f someone makes a big CSAM generator button and puts it in front of millions of users, it also deserves legal attention.

TrainedMonkey 9mo ago
It was an unserious response to an absolutist statement. I pointing out where such absolutism would lead if applied to other areas. I don't think fingerprint scanner on guns will be effective as it tracks ownership and not legality of usage. However, a number of modern vehicles do have capabilities to perform autonomous actions, including overriding user input.
- llmslave2 9mo ago
  It's not an absolutist statement and it doesn't lead to any of the insane conclusions you came up with. Holding the people running a model liable for what it generates has nothing to do with making tool makers liable.
xigoi 9mo ago
It’s not a CSAM generation button, it’s a general content generation button that someone used to generate CSAM, and it’s that someone who is responsible for it.