> We’ve also introduced additional content safeguards for this experience, such as blocking prompts and generations in a wider range of categories.
Oh good, just what wasn't needed.
Oh good, just what wasn't needed.
These are businesses. Those servers cost money. That compute costs even more. The AI experts, (real AI experts by the way, not tensorflow and pytorch monkeys), cost big money as well. Someone better be paying for all that.
So if the people who want offensive content are willing to pony up the dollars, then great. I've got no problem with giving them what they want. But if they want Barbie or Cocomelon to pay for the offensive content, then yeah, they can be safely ignored. Block as much as you like. (Or rather, block as much as Barbie wants blocked. Which is probably more than you like, but they're paying you handsomely for it.)
It might be a while till that is feasible, though. Until then, "content safeguards" will continue to feel like overreaching, artificial stonewalls scattered across otherwise kinda-consistent space.
In the past, I thought that search engines censored content because of the advertiser's demands, but now that AI search switched to the paid model I think the censorship is purely ideological because these companies are based in San Francisco.
In the early internet, you'd almost always end up with a few pictures of naked girls in the search results, and many pages showed ads for porn sites.
That's just not a good experience if you are at work and trying to get stuff done.
Search engines have gotten much better, and in most cases explicit results are now only shown when you actively look for them.