[ThrowawayR2]

The author's example is too extreme, which is turning people off. Better examples would have been LLMs subtly giving inadequate responses on how to increase token efficiency or how to organize labor unions or info about protesting against datacenter construction because they're against the business interests of the LLM providers. Crimes against their business model, so to speak.

Wasn't there some HN submission recently about one of the LLM providers fingerprinting responses or refusing to respond to hinder R&D of competing LLMs?

[EDIT] Or, if he did want to be extreme but in a way that aligns with the American historical mythos, he could have used fomenting armed rebellion against a tyrannical government as the example.

[saturn8601]

This is a fundamental problem in politics in my opinion. Everybody has different values and points of view so they may see the same thing completely differently. Its what makes humans great but also frustrating. geohots example will work for some, others will be convinced of the opposite opinion, and others will just let is pass them by and not understand the implications. The same could be applied to your examples to a different degree.

Politicians try to use different examples for the audience they are speaking to.