4 ms·

No, it's not, because not exceeding those permissions and safeguards is part of what I want.

• gkoberger 3mo ago
  Did you explicitly set them and enforce them, though?
  • jibal 3mo ago
    You're moving the goalposts. Being overeager is not what we want. How to prevent it is a different issue. P.S. The response completely ignores this argument. If I say "fix X" and it does so illegally or destructively or harmfully to myself or others, that's over eager by definition. Again, how to prevent that is another matter. > I think everyone has different examples in their mind Yeah, some have examples in mind that go out of their way not to engage the issue -- that's a form of bad faith.
    • gkoberger 3mo ago
      I don't think I am. If I say "fix X issue," and it does it in a way I think is overstepping a boundary I wasn't expecting, I don't think it's fair to categorize it as a negative unless I explicitly told it not to. That being said, I think everyone has different examples in their mind. So I think it's possible we're all arguing over different issues.
      • fluoridation 3mo ago
        >I don't think it's fair to categorize it as a negative unless I explicitly told it not to. That rules shouldn't be broken is implied by what a rule is. If I tell it to not violate its permissions, do I also need to tell it to obey when I tell it not to violate its permissions, and so on?