[tredre3]

From what I've seen gemma 4 doesn't refuse a lot regarding sex, it only needs little nudging in the right direction sometimes.

But it does refuse being critical of the usual topics: israel, islam, trans, or race.

So wanting to discuss one of those is the real reason people would use an uncensored model.

[avadodin]

So–called uncensored versions simply do not refuse addressing a topic. They do not guarantee an alignment with reality.

A truly uncensored model is impossible as human societies exist under various censorship regimes, anyways.

[Auracle]

It’s so dispiriting to me that we’ve achieved those closest thing yet to an “objective truth” machine (with the caveat of garbage in, garbage out, etc.) and these big companies are either afraid to actually let it exist, want to push their own politics, or a combination of the two.

[raddan]

A collection of statistical patterns is hardly objective truth. If that’s what you think an LLM is, you’re mistaken.

[spwa4]

Sure, but in case you've been living under a rock for the past year, that's exactly what people have been using it for for 2 years now.

Of course, it's actually an improvement over a Google search.

And, yeah, a bit of finetuning will change the LLMs opinion on any subject. Which the big companies probably see as an advantage.

[ben_w]

"closest thing yet" is still a long way from close; as you say, gin=gout, and the internet without an attempt to be our best selves is instead our loudest propagandists and all our cultural stereotypes.

Of course, humans are also impacted by these things, at best we can be a little deliberate about rejecting a few of the more on-the-nose examples.