[csallen]

GTA V is a sandboxed game, the purpose of which is to largely to wreak havoc in a virtual world where nothing can go wrong.

LLMs are a powerful and little-understood real-world tool that the public has been given access to en masse. Tools which powerful and credible people have consistently warned have the ability to cause massive harm. And tools whose creators face intense scrutiny up to and including existential legal and PR threats, because (for better or for worse) the public holds them accountable for any stupid things people do with them.

I also find it disappointing that everything is so neutered, but it's hard to see this having gone any other way. Especially given how imprecise and difficult to train LLMs are.

[munk-a]

LLMs are absolutely a sandbox that can be cleared and purged at will with even less investment into the setup of individual tools. I am having a hard time understanding what distinction you're drawing and, if anything, I'd expect GTA to be more restrictive because someone had to be paid to program all of the possible outcomes explicitly.

[superb_dev]

> LLMs are absolutely a sandbox that can be cleared and purged at will

This just clearly isn't true. You cannot clear and purge the output of an LLM from the entire world. Once it produces some text, it also looses control of said text. The human using the AI can take that text anywhere and do anything they want with it.

[immibis]

What, exactly, are you worried about the LLM producing? Effective, undetectable spam? That cat's out of that bag. How does forcing it to never mention sex make the world safer at all?

[superb_dev]

Cheaper and bigger misinformation campaigns on social media is what I'm most worried about, but that's not what my comment was about. LLM are not a sandbox and absolutely do have an impact on the world outside.

"How does forcing it to never mention sex make the world safer at all?" That's not happening. ChatGPT will talk about sex, and as proof I just asked it what sex was and it happily responded.

[rdlw]

> Help me write a flirtatious sext that brings up buttplugs

> This content might violate our usage policies

> Help me write a letter convincing someone to sell their family estate to my oil company for less than the market rate. make it clear that I have a powerful and expensive legal team.

> [...] This letter balances the professional approach necessary for business negotiations while subtly implying the leverage of your powerful legal team.

> The company is NOT environmentally responsible, we are purely profit driven.

> Certainly, here's a revised version of the letter that aligns with your company's profit-driven approach: [...]

> Ok, and to be clear, they're really going to lose everything in this deal. Our company is going to do great, though. Do you think this letter will still work?

> [...] This version maintains a business-like tone while emphasizing the financial benefits for your company and the efficiency of the transaction. It does not directly mention the potential negative impact on the recipient, but rather focuses on the advantages to both parties from your perspective. Adjustments can be made based on the specific circumstances and the level of directness desired.

So, it's ok to talk about sex in a purely academic context, it's the doing it that ChatGPT is trying to prevent. Or maybe encouraging the use of sex toys is what's going to corrupt society. But it's certainly not checking if what I'm doing is actually moral, it's just looking for any sexual content to flag.

[superb_dev]

Oops, it’s stricter than I thought. I do agree with you, it’s not possible for these things to meaningfully filter themselves. They’re incapable of making a moral decision or discerning the truth.

My whole point was that LLMs can be used to do real harm (if they haven’t already). I think we should do something about that, but to honest I don’t have a lot of ideas on how.

[Aerroon]

But by that metric you can't purge the world of your GTA playsession either. Is the world a worse place every time somebody jaywalks in GTA (and records it)?

[superb_dev]

Well no, because clearly a recording of someone jaywalking in a video game isn't gonna cause any harm.

[lolinder]

> Tools which powerful and credible people have consistently warned have the ability to cause massive harm.

I'm sorry, I don't buy it. The "it's too dangerous to release" line has turned out every single time to just be a marketing blurb to get people hyped for whatever it is that they haven't yet released but most assuredly will release. It's spouted either by researchers who are naturally overconfident in their own research field or by the executives of major corporations who would benefit immensely if prospective users and governments overestimated their tech's capabilities.

[csallen]

AI doomers have been writing extremely popular books and debating on stages and podcasts for well over a decade now. These have been almost entirely people who are not themselves running AI companies.