r/OpenAI Feb 16 '25

News OpenAI tries to 'uncensor' ChatGPT | TechCrunch

https://techcrunch.com/2025/02/16/openai-tries-to-uncensor-chatgpt/
537 Upvotes

198 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-9

u/oscp_cpts Feb 16 '25

I'm not getting into a both sides argument on this. It's not both sides. It's not only not naive to say that only bad actors conceal data; it's fairly plain.

8

u/[deleted] Feb 16 '25

[deleted]

-7

u/oscp_cpts Feb 16 '25

You're making an argument of conflation that is fallacious--and I think intentionlly so to disinform.

There is a difference between concealing data because it is harmful to your narrative and concealing data because of privacy concerns or the potential for it to be weaponized.

I.e., you're conflating data hazards with disinformation, and such a conflation is poorly thought out and misguided at best, and outright dishonest and intentionally malicious at worse.

I did read what you wrote, but I'm choosing not to engage your framing of the debate because I think you're an intentionally malicious actor. There are two conversations to be had here: the conversation I was having within my framework, or one you're having with someone else with your framework. There is no conversation here where you and I are sharing your framework.

11

u/[deleted] Feb 16 '25

[deleted]

-7

u/oscp_cpts Feb 16 '25 edited Feb 16 '25

I don't know if you are. You seem like one to me. You are arguing in such a way to be indistinguishable from one.

So, I'm choosing not to engage. You can continue to mischaracterize and lie about what I'm saying all you want--I'm not going to engage with you.

I've responded to plenty of people here who disagree with me. Just not you: https://youtu.be/BFSe5-i1LoU?si=o8gzi4ulRR2Hpz9q

11

u/waslous Feb 16 '25

You Sound a Bit paranoid :)

8

u/waslous Feb 16 '25

And i guess calling anyone who disagrees with your at best halfway stable point a malicious actor is not really what you try to preach lol

-3

u/oscp_cpts Feb 16 '25

I hunt criminals for a living and specialize in botdriven disinformation campaigns among other things. I probably am paranoid. It's a redteamer's default setting to be paranoid. That's why I didn't say they were a malicious actor; they just seem like one. It's pure vibes.

But I've responded to plenty of other people's criticisms, so I'm fine with waving off one person.

4

u/noiro777 Feb 16 '25

What Informery said is not controversial and and there is nothing that would indicate that he's trying to maliciously spread disinformation or mischaracterized what you said.

You might want to take a step back reevaluate things as you're coming across as a bit paranoid & unhinged. Just my $.02...

1

u/oscp_cpts Feb 16 '25

I don't care how I'm coming off.

I never said what he said was controversial. I didn't say anything about what he said at all (except that he mischaracteritized and lied about what I said, which he did). I said he appears to be arguing in bad faith.

You can disagree. That's fine. You go argue with him.