This is the exact same argument used against gun control and it’s disingenuous at best; obfuscating and lying at worst.
Of course we should limit the scope and availability of the tools that people use to cause harm to other people. Especially when other LLMs have been able to prevent this from occurring.
Yes. And they indeed did drastically limit the scope, so what is your point. They took action and people still complain whilst not complaining at all about the remaining free alternatives like I mentioned.
The argument used against gun control in the US, when other OECD countries don’t have the same issue. I mean: if you chart per capita US is an outlier, not that gun deaths don’t exist in other OECD countries.
I think it’s important to include because most of these companies are US tech companies so some of the underlying culture that’s sustaining the guns issue is more pronounced in the US could be effecting this issue
I’m saying that we should stop the people, not the tools.
We imprison murderers, we don’t stop selling knives.
This is the exact same argument used against gun control and it’s disingenuous at best; obfuscating and lying at worst.
Of course we should limit the scope and availability of the tools that people use to cause harm to other people. Especially when other LLMs have been able to prevent this from occurring.
Yes. And they indeed did drastically limit the scope, so what is your point. They took action and people still complain whilst not complaining at all about the remaining free alternatives like I mentioned.
Agreed with a minor clarification:
The argument used against gun control in the US, when other OECD countries don’t have the same issue. I mean: if you chart per capita US is an outlier, not that gun deaths don’t exist in other OECD countries.
I think it’s important to include because most of these companies are US tech companies so some of the underlying culture that’s sustaining the guns issue is more pronounced in the US could be effecting this issue