Well we can lay our principles regardless.

But there are two factors that are sort of truths...one propriety has slid, to accept that the its ok for the US gov to break its first amendment laws. The 2nd is that OPENai is developing with this principle....its very very much evolving to be able to censor free speech with it with the flip of a switch.

I don't really think anyone is willing to argue that openAI isn't controlled by state. But given the way twitter and facebook have proven and shown evidence that the state won't let them operate without free speech controls I think again the onus is on proponents of censorship to show that somehow we can expect openAI to be a different case.

You do understand there are very few, if any, online sites that allow absolute free speech, right? I'm not sure why you're so concerned about OpenAI restricting things in a similar fashion to most other sites, including Elon-owned Twitter.

This is news to me.

Its a completely different question to me, to ask whether or not it can say things, or whether or not I am allowed to say things to it. And its moderating flags go WELL beyond hate speech right now. So where is your citation?

It would be weird if thats how the mods here treated this.....

Because its kind of my point, like if you tell the mods 'hey jbouton might say something bad lock this thread'...but really I'm asking about proprieties affects on the overton window here and the overton windows affects our ability to access ai.

Put another way...should AI be constitutionally protected against the governments censorship.

You are possibly unfamiliar with the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, and also with Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. And you have possibly not considered the issue of who decides what shall be deemed 'horrible' and therefore unsayable, and you have possibly not considered either that in many if not most countries (such as, say, Canada, Iran or Communist China) the unsayable means any deviation, however slight, from the ideology of the ruling clique.

So you believe there are people that are willing to argue that openAI isn't state influenced? And let me use strong wording, state influence in a way that breaks the first amendment? Do you know of the recent controversy?

Try to find me a source that claims thats its not understand state control (ill scrutinize.).

Yes and its worse than that....its recursive...because if you aren't going to evaluate something human said, what is going to be the evaluator? Its this thing in question.

So hate speech regs, can go against the amendment, and then you have the AI DECIDE if what you said falls UNDER those regs, which breach your freedoms in the first place....

No, I think that saying bad stuff just because you can doesn't bring anything positive to the world. Or yourself.

So I write a story involving f@gs, about and old british bloke, and ive been pegged by the ai, and propriety then supports my censorship. JFC.

Did you go back and see all of the credible experts and credible science that twitter and facebook were forced to censor from their sites over the last 2 years? And all of the political censorship they did...or did you just ignore all this once it was proved and sourced with evidence?

Influenced, or controlled? Those are very different things, and you seem to be interchanging the two terms as if they're the same.

As for the controversy, perhaps you can explain more. If you mean the recent Sam Altman stuff, I'm not sure how that fits here. If it's something else, I'm not sure what you're referring to.

didn't really pay that much attention to it, honestly

Wait, you're writing stories and reading them to ChatGPT? And this one was about chez getting pegged by a robot? What's the preamble, was the robot at chez' office to fix the photocopier?

Why should the people who made GPT cater to your needs? Build your own racist-ass chat bot if this is such an important thing for you.

Are we running out of organic racist bullshit in the world? Seems like we don’t actually needs AI to churn out anti-Semitic conspiracy bullshit, there’s plenty of it already.

What I'm really wondering about is why this thread now, and why is it about ChatGPT specifically? Why are you not bothered about every other site that does the same thing? Why are you not bothered that the self-proclaimed free speech absolutist Elon doesn't allow free speech on Twitter? Why aren't you railing against 2+2 rules?

Probably the only interlocutor he's ever had who doesn't tell him that he is totally incomprehensible within the first 30 seconds of interacting with him.

I'm asking about whether or not we should be allowed to. I'm not asking about what a private venture should be able to do.

I fully support a private ventures decisions about their own platforms.

Not sure what you are citing with elon, but elon is the one that provide the evidence that the US state was constantly breaking the first amendment thru its control of twitter and facebook. Thats what I'm referring to and asking about.

Well my uni calc teacher, after my first exam, took me out of the class to ask me to join the putnam team we had. So its not really everyone.

well its not going to give you balanced information if there special rules about asking about jewish culture right?

Lol, even taking this as true, how exactly does being good at maths make your writing comprehensible again?

Then what are you whining about? Chat GPT is not public utility, they can impose whatever rules they want on the program.

Then why this thread? Why can't OpenAI do as they choose?

Simply using his site as an example of one that doesn't allow free speech.

Its true. You can't understand me. I get that. Others can.
The question is whether or not you feel its acceptable for state to enforce such controls. So that NO AI is allowed to provide free speech.
Twitter was breaking the 1st amendment in cooperation with the state before Elon. There is no evidence that is happening now and elon was directly cited as being responsible for bringing the evidence to light. Again you are alluding to something, but you aren't citing anything.

Do I have to say back to you.... no twitter isn't censoring free speech right now.