[ninjalanternshk]

We should be basing public policy on facts not marketing language.

[altmanaltman]

Amazon CEO literally told US gov officials that it could be jailbroken and is dangerous. That was a fact (or from the pov of the gov it was). If they were going to ban based on marketing, all LLMs models would have been banned by now.

[Insanity]

This assumes that the people in charge for public policy understand the technology beyond the marketing. Which I don’t think is this case based on the track record of policymakers when it comes to essentially any technology.

[Atotalnoob]

Why? You can’t yell fire in a crowded place, but “this is going to destroy the world, sign up now” is okay?

Most things should be fact based, but you also should have limits to your marketing

[estearum]

Did Anthropic say "this is going to destroy the world, sign up now"? The details matter quite a lot actually in free speech cases.

Should a nuclear energy startup that says "nuclear weapons are very dangerous and should be regulated" be liable to have its assets frozen?