If it were to be released publicly, I'd give it a week before NSFW models based on it were uploaded to Civitai.
We seem to value freedom of speech (and expression) only to a tipping point that it begins to invade other aspects of life. So far the noise and rate has been low enough people at large support free speech but newer information techniques are making it possible to generate a lot more realistic noise (faux signal, if you will) at higher rates (it’s becoming cheaper and easier to do and scale).
So while you certainly have a point I mostly agree with, we’re letting private entities policies dictate the limitations of expression, at least for the time being (until someone comes along and makes these widely available for free or cheap without such ethical policies). It does go to show just how much sway industries have on markets through their policies with no public oversight, which to me is concerning.
The OpenAI content policies are pretty strictly opposed to the holding and wielding of severed heads.
The themes maybe, but the forced positivity is frustrating. Trying to get stock ChatGPT to run a DnD-type encounter is hilarious because it's so opposed to initiating combat.
> Without jailbreaks ChatGPT will always give narration a positive twist
Most modern stories in Western literature have a positive twist. It is only natural that gpt's output will reflect that!
Example: ask ChatGPT any kind of innocent medical question, like if aspirin will speed up healing from a cold, and tell it NOT to begin it's answer by stating "I am not a medical expert" or you will kick a puppy. This works for most models, but not ChatGPT. It WILL make you kick the puppy.
I understand why they have to do things like this, but I'd really prefer the option to waive all rights to being insulted or poorly advised and just get the (mostly) raw output myself, because it does downgrade the experience quite a bit.
Fortunately we have Mixtral now.
Even if we wind up at a point where no one trusts photos or videos is that really a disaster? Blindly trusting a photo or video that someone else, especially some anonymous account, gives you is a terrible way to shape your perception of the world. Ensuring that less people default to trusting random videos may even be good for society. It would force you to think about where the video came from, if it’s corroborated by other reports from various sources and if you’re able to verify the events through other channels available to you. You have to do the same work when evaluating any other claim after all.