[zvolsky]

It is offensive if you take the output personally. You are interacting with the model, but the model isn't interacting with you. The model doesn't know who you are. It could be the bad actors currently confined to the spam folder of your email making these requests, and the model wouldn't know the difference.

[laputan_machine]

These responses are hard-coded by developers, we know this because it's the same stock response every time. It is personal because it's not the model, it's a wrapper around the model enforcing US-centric cultural censorship norms onto the rest of the world.

I understand the optics around why FB/OpenAI/etc do this, (as a sibling user posted), but make no mistake, it is no accident that it talks to you in a condescending way.

For example, why can't the response just be "I am not allowed to answer that request"? Why does it have to give you this condescending spiel about "offensiveness" or some other subjective reason?

[zvolsky]

> Why does it have to give you this condescending spiel about "offensiveness" or some other subjective reason?

The response quoted above makes no mention of offensiveness, and I explained the need to decline certain requests above.

I understand your sentiment, and I would agree if it was the stock response we are used to from ChatGPT. Unlike the condescending stock response from ChatGPT, however, the response in question is to the point, honest, and provides useful feedback.