because only a few at every level of government liked them *and* their legal status is very dubious
There, there. With enough of China-sponsored whipping up, the liking of a nuclear weapons research lab can be sunk overnight just as well. Indeed, this very story describes a symptom of that happening.
the rule of law is excruciatingly imperiled atm
"At the moment"? Laughing out loud...
This effectively is a fight between two branches of government, one federal, the other municipal
Federal government is at quite a disadvantage on local level — as ICE have found out dealing with other (or the same) anti-Americans.
David just might defeat Goliath
David was neither an insurrectionist, nor given aid or comfort to the enemies of his government.
I think you have the power-dynamic all backwards.
You do. Government's — even local town government's — power over businesses is immense and quite literally keeps us all from having good things.
Your data from [connected apps] isn't used to train our models
Why not — and why are people so worked up about it?
Do you resent a junior colleague learning from you too? Would you like employers to starting stupulating a right to erase memories of a departing employee upon termination of employment — lest, heaven forbid, he profits from the experience gained working at one place during the rest of his career?
There are special cases, but in general, of course conversations and collaboration should be enriching for both sides.
The thread that runs through your examples is knowingly allowing or directly facilitating known illegal activity.
It seems, you're stressing out the "knowingly" part as the distinction making a difference. But certainly, ChatGPT knew — or should have known — what the conversation was about. I've seen AI use terms like "narrative ark"...
If Google could be accused for abetting illegal drug importation, it does not seem unreasonable to go after ChatGPT in this case, not that I personally approve of either...
I asked Claude to find similar targeting of libraries or phonebook-providers in the pre-Internet era, and here are the two remotely related ones below.
The rot of criminal prosecutions of speech seems to originate from Europe...
It would be a problematic precedent if there were criminal liability
Here is a list of examples from the pre-AI era kindly put together for me by Claude... With the prosecuting attorneys' party-affiliations, because BeauHD felt it is important:
After claude found the issues, humans could check and fix them
Claude can do the fixing too, just as easily, in most cases. Maybe, Mythos cannot — never tried it — but Opus or even Sonnet certainly can.
Neither of them fucked a kid, but only Donald Trump would pass a physical nowadays — not that their job requires it. And we both know it.
Button up, your Jew-hatred is showing...
they were able to pass the physical.
Oh, come on, stop harping on Joe Biden's frailty — he's been out of office for over a year now!
But you don't read the generated binaries, do you? Not even the assembly text...
I've been wondering for many years before the first traffic camera appeared, why the toll-roads aren't enforcing the speed limits automatically. The time you enter and exit the highway is recorded down to a second. The distance between these two points is known — your average speed could be computed on the spot even with the early 90-ies technology...
The polite police officers would be standing right behind the toll-booths issuing tickets without the drama of hiding in the bushes, then chasing you at highway speeds...
And, yeah, you could lower it by stopping at a rest area — but it'd still be a tremendous disincentive to speed.
I was and continue to hope, that such universal enforcement, affecting all voters, would cause the limits to go up to reasonable figures — or even be abolished completely...
I've run into these people, they're the worst
When have you last checked your compiler's output?
Experiments must be reproducible; they should all fail in the same way.
