why are you talking about open ai? They’re not even involved in this.
You asked why they weren’t in legal trouble. I told you.
You asserted that any safeguards they put in place (“they” in this case being an open source project, and a startup that provides their models for free, not the billionaires you think you’re mad at) couldn’t be functional because the tool requires csam to generate csam. I told you that was incorrect, because the whole point is to generate things it hasn’t seen before.
You explode on a set of insult laden rants because, as far as I can tell, you don’t want to say “oh, I misunderstood. I still think they’re grossly irresponsible for not including safeguards in the first place, and how can we actually trust the safeguards they have now?”. You know, like a reasonable person would have.
Instead you assumed that the only reason someone could disagree with your factually incorrect assumptions about how something works, is if they’re a “creepy misinformation spreading narc” (… Narc? That one doesn’t even make sense)
Do you even know what misinformation means? Do you think that “ability to magic csam into existence from nothing” (which is what it can do) is something that I think is somehow better than it only being able to make it from known examples?
You asked why they weren’t in legal trouble. I told you.
You asserted that any safeguards they put in place (“they” in this case being an open source project, and a startup that provides their models for free, not the billionaires you think you’re mad at) couldn’t be functional because the tool requires csam to generate csam. I told you that was incorrect, because the whole point is to generate things it hasn’t seen before.
You explode on a set of insult laden rants because, as far as I can tell, you don’t want to say “oh, I misunderstood. I still think they’re grossly irresponsible for not including safeguards in the first place, and how can we actually trust the safeguards they have now?”. You know, like a reasonable person would have.
Instead you assumed that the only reason someone could disagree with your factually incorrect assumptions about how something works, is if they’re a “creepy misinformation spreading narc” (… Narc? That one doesn’t even make sense)
Do you even know what misinformation means? Do you think that “ability to magic csam into existence from nothing” (which is what it can do) is something that I think is somehow better than it only being able to make it from known examples?