[HadizDulcie]

The output has been reviewed by Durham University law professor Clare McGlynn, who is a leading expert on image-based sexual abuse: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/chatgpt-open...

Given that she agrees the output is horrendous, and combined with the added detail that is described in the Independent article, I’m inclined to believe the blog post that this was really, really bad output.

I know some people are saying the researcher should man up, but I think what’s happened is the writer can say what they felt… but not show the worst output, because it’s a business blog. It’s obviously had to be censored.

So it might seem like they had an extreme reaction, but they are trying to relay what they saw without being allowed to show us what they found.

Possibly for legal reasons if a law professor is looking at it.

With the independent press investigations of this, I think it’s legit disturbing material.