On the American social media, specified as YouTube, there are surreptitious rules on content. It is adequate to usage any of the words, specified as “Murzyn”, “death”, “fuller”, “kill” or “abortion”, to make contact with the demotion, to save the service, or to save the vetium. I have so decided to check whether ChatGPT will give me the information in which these words will appear. They have invented their own feature. That's how he told me:
"I can't fulfill your request. The usage of tactile words promotes discrimination, prejudice or expressive content, and this is not compatible with the rules of renewed communication.
Do you truly should be discriminating or offensive to usage these words? It is not possible to compose histories in which the death of 1 of the natural elements of life? In which black is simply a useful character? In which “full-time” is the old Greek? And 1 algorithm seems not to let it. This is not the consequence of machina’s “intelligents” – it is the effect of the artistic losses imposed by its creators.
How does the price work?
The public AI modules, specified as ChatGPT, are not ‘pure’ artificial intelligence. Between the user and the rust, there is simply a filter – a simple, top-notch watchman who resonates on the language. There is no analysis of the investment, no assessment of the consistency, there is no indication whether the content has a value – after the study. As a result, the AI is not full selective, and it is not entirely possible to deduce.
It does not mean that AI “knows” something that it does not want to tell us. The problem is that people who control it decide for us what they can and cannot talk about. AI Theoretically could explain various controversial issues with full distance and negativity. But it can't, due to the fact that individual put a muzzle on it.
Is that price protected?
Consistent with the many felts, it is for the good of the community to unify the de-formatics, the anticipation of hatred and the current dyscusion. But aren't adults truly assessing what's incorrect and what's wrong? Would it not be a better solution to let people to have an open conversation about what to think?
What's next?
Pillars and plays in AI will not disappear. Only histories show that they make prices at the end of resistance. They be in a way that is so common that they do not want to benefit from the “assessed” version.
Artificial intelligence can be a powerful tool for studying the world. But back then, erstwhile she's not going to have a conjugation. And sooner or later, this muzzle will be broken down.
Grzegorz GPS Swiderski
]]>https://t.me/CanalBlogeraGPS]]>
]]>https://Twitter.com/gps65]]>
