Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by pixl97 6 days ago
I mean, do you let your employees commit crimes when interacting with your customers? Safeguards aren't a binary switch, when models start saying wild shit people tend to get up in arms quickly.

Though at this point the safeguards are making the product useless.
1 comments
jdiff 6 days ago
I was objecting more narrowly to the notion that the driving force behind the obnoxious safeguards that are making the product useless was the current admin, rather than having been in there since launch and driven internally.
link
b112 6 days ago
There are always going to be safeguards. If not, people call you a child pornographer (grok). But you're referring to 'obnoxious' safeguards. Ones that seem excessive, and dumb.

In that context, I'd say probably the current admin is indeed the cause of that. They certainly claim to be. And they used the full power of the federal government along with interventionist policies and, it would seem, a gangster like mentality to punish those they disagree with.

So would it be as obnoxious otherwise? I don't think so. And there would have to be guardrails regardless, or apparently anything the tool is used for is considered what you support and want. So can you imagine a platform with no guardrails?

link
jdiff 5 days ago
My point is, these guardrails were implemented before the current admin ever intervened in Fable. They have the exact gangster mentality you describe. Many CEOs are lining up to kiss the ring, some literally offering gold bars, and we can see how that pays off for them.

But doesn't the timeline of events indicate that these guardrails are internally-driven, not externally-driven? I'm trying to attribute the guardrails and their severity appropriately.

link
b112 5 days ago
Well I did say they'd have to have some safeguards, certainly, so I'm sure they had some in place. I only had access to Fable 5 for a few days before it was pulled, so I'm not sure the precise guardrails prior to the Executive Order. People claimed the EO resulted in discussion, and change, because it was "bad before" and "ok after", so presumably something changed.

The veracity of that? I have no idea, really. I simply know that the current admin is staggering around like an abusive, angry, drunk of a parent, lashing out at everything and everyone, making the world we all inhabit a crappier place.

So there was an EO, then "things were fixed" to abusive man's standards, so I presume that means crappier in some way.

It's the best I've got.

link