It's interesting to note OpenAI's decision regarding the ban on using ChatGPT for "Military and Warfare" applications. For more updates and insights on AI developments, visit ChatGPT.
Yes, it is ture my account is too banned without any notice or anything. However, here are some websites where we can use chatgpt free on cost: ChatGPT Spanish ChatGPT Svenska ChatGPT French
Welcome to ChatGPT Japan, where the power of artificial intelligence meets the beauty of the Japanese language. Our website is dedicated to exploring the capabilities and applications of ChatGPT, an advanced language model developed by OpenAI, tailored specifically for the Japanese audience.
Whether you’re a developer looking to integrate チャットGPT into your projects, a business seeking to enhance customer interactions, or simply curious about the possibilities of AI, ChatGPT Japan is your go-to resource. Join us as we delve into the world of AI-driven conversations in Japanese and discover the endless possibilities that ChatGPT has to offer.
Welcome to Outlook Login Japan, your gateway to seamless access and personalized experiences within the Outlook ecosystem tailored specifically for our Japanese users. As part of the globally recognized Outlook platform, Outlook Login Japan offers a user-friendly interface and robust security features to ensure your communication and productivity needs are met with ease and peace of mind. Whether you’re managing emails, scheduling meetings, or collaborating with colleagues, our platform provides intuitive tools and localized support to enhance your digital workflow. Join us as we empower you to stay connected and productive in today’s fast-paced world, all while embracing the efficiency and reliability of Outlook Login Japan.
The change is that a general ban on military use has been removed in favor of a generalized ban on harm.
So for example, the Army could use it to do their accounting, but not to generate a disinformation campaign against a hostile nation.
If anyone actually really read the article, we could have a productive conversation around whether any military usage is truly harmless, the nuances of the usefulness of a military ban in a world where so much military labor is outsourced to private corporations which could ‘launder’ terms compliance, or the general inability of terms to preemptively prevent harmful use at all.
Instead, we have people taking the headline only and discussing AI being put in charge of nukes.
Lemmy seems to care a lot more about debating straw men arguments about how terrible AI is than engaging with reality.
I guess, but I never got hooked on any of the big social media sites, and the few I did (reddit mostly) I limited myself to rather non-political subjects like jokes and specific kinds of content. I’m new to Lemmy and this is most of what I’ve been seeing, which is why I said that.
Obviously I know that this is what all social media looks like these days. I hoped Lemmy would have at least some noticeable vocal minority of balanced people, but nah.
The point is that it’s a purposeful slow walk, the entire “non-profit” framing and these “limitations” are a very calculated marketing play to soften the justified fears of unregulated, for-profit ( I.e. Endless growth) AI development. It will find its way to full evil with 1000 small cuts, and with folks like you arguing for them at every step along the way, “IT’S JUST A SMALL CUT!!!”
It will find its way to full evil with 1000 small cuts, and with folks like you arguing for them at every step along the way, “IT’S JUST A SMALL CUT!!!”
While I do think AI development isn’t going to be going in the direction you think it is, if you read it carefully you’ll notice that I’m actually not saying anything about whether it’s “a small cut” or not, I’m simply laying out the key nuance of the article that no one is reading.
My point isn’t “OpenAI changing the scope of their military ban is a good thing” it’s “people should read the fucking article before commenting if we want to have productive discussion.”
If I did accounting (or even just cooking, really) for the Mafia would be less bad than actually going with a gun to tether or kill people but it would still be bad.
Why? Because it still helps an organisation which core mission is hurting people.
And it’s purely out of greed because ChatGPT doesn’t desperately need this application otherwise they will go bankrupt
That would count as harm and be disallowed by the current policy.
But a military application of using GPT to identify and filter misinformation would not be harm, and would have been prevented by the previous policy prohibiting any military use, but would be allowed under the current policy.
Of course, it gets murkier if the military application of identifying misinformation later ends up with a drone strike on the misinformer. In theory they could submit a usage description of “identify misinformation” which appears to do no harm, but then take the identifications to cause harm.
Which is part of why a broad ban on military use may have been more prudent than a ban only on harmful military usage.
I’m honestly kind of shocked at this. I know for our annual evaluations this year, people were using ChatGPT to write their statements.
I thought for sure someone with a secret squirrel type job was going to use it for that innocuous purpose, end up inputting top secret information, and then the DoD would ban the practice completely.
Language learning models are all about identifying patterns in how humans use words and copying them. Thing is that’s also how people tend to do things a lot of the time. If you give the LLM enough tertiary data it may be capable of ‘accidentally’ (read: randomly) outputting things you don’t want people to see.
Add comment