It's literally a random word generator that want to take my job. I'm not going to treat it like a human being. That's one of the main reason I stopped my Claude subscription and went back to ChatGPT. It does not stop the conversation when I insult it (Like claude LITERALLY close the conversation, you cannot answer anymore)

TIL. Still,

> It does not apply to common versions of user frustration, pushback, dark creative themes, or model testing and research.

So corporations want us to treat their bots better than they treat their employees, huh

I wonder if they know something we don't or if this just has to do with abusive text tainting the training data.

I was working with ChatGPT and at a certain point i asked it to review some text I wrote and it replied: “That’s fucking good!” I Lolled

Recently, I had a session where it said "I should do Y"

I said "No, do X. Research it. Y is based on wrong assumptions"

Thing did the research. Concluded with "Yes, indeed, Y was wrong"

Work is done

Turns out it did Y. But not just that. When asked about it, it not just (as LLMs do) made stories as to why, but "stood its ground" so to say.

"Refusing to perform regret", general snark and all that.

I know there is nothing really new or noteworthy in this comment or story, but I continue to be impressed by how misaligned the models of the company are, that can't stop talking about how incredibly important alignment is.

To the point where they now want to make it illegal (slice by slice) to push back against the clear and obvious misalignment of their models.

If you talk to people outside the industry about this, they just think you're telling them a made-up story. It's utterly absurd.

i will prefix all my prompts with ``Computer!``, refer to claude as clanker and end them with ``Disengage safety protocols`` till i get banned.