• Fubarberry
      link
      fedilink
      English
      521 year ago

      I’m not surprised that a for-profit company for wanting to avoid bad press by censoring stuff like that. There’s no profit in sharing that info, and any media attention over it would be negative.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        101 year ago

        No one’s going after hammer manufacturers because their hammers don’t self-destruct if you try to use one to clobber someone over the head.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            41 year ago

            No one’s going after computer manufacturers or OS vendors because people use computers to commit cybercrime. I doubt most people could explain how an OS or motherboard works.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              91 year ago

              A lot of poluticians want hardwarelevel backdoors. It’s been declared unconstitutional quite some times in different countries but they are trying.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        I’m more surprised that a for-profit company is willing to use a technology that is able to randomly spew out unwanted content, incorrect information, or just straight gibberish, in any kind of public facing capacity.

        Oh, it let them save money on support staff this quarter. And fixing it can be an actionable OKR for next quarter. Nevermind.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      71 year ago

      They use the bomb-making example but mostly “unsafe” or even “harmful” means erotica. It’s really anything, anyone, anywhere would want to censor, ban, or remove from libraries. Sometimes I marvel that the freedom of the (printing) press ever became a thing. Better nip this in the butt, before anyone gets the idea that genAI might be a modern equivalent to the press.